Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Administrative Tribunal’s Orders, Emphasizes the Need for Reasoned Decisions in Case Transfers

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court has overturned two orders issued by the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal, highlighting the importance of providing well-reasoned decisions when transferring cases between benches. The decision, delivered by Justice V. Kameswar Rao and Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, brings attention to the principles of natural justice in administrative actions.

The judgment, which pertained to W.P.(C) 6326/2023 and W.P.(C) 7341/2023, revolved around the transfer of cases initiated by the State of Bihar against Indian Police Service (IPS) Officer Amit Lodha. The State had challenged orders issued by the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, which had transferred and retained the cases.

Justice Rao and Justice Mendiratta emphasized that administrative authorities, even when exercising powers to transfer cases, must adhere to principles of natural justice, including the necessity for well-reasoned decisions. The court observed that the Chairman’s orders lacked the required reasoning, violating these principles.

“The law with regard to the nature of power exercised by the Chairman of the Tribunal has been settled by the Supreme Court in the case of All India Institute of Medical Sciences v. Sanjiv Chaturvedi, (2020) 17 SCC 602, wherein the Apex Court has clearly held that the power to transfer cases from one Bench to another under Section 25 is an administrative power of the Chairman,” the court stated.

The court further added, “One of the submissions of Mr. Amanullah was that the impugned orders render Sections 18 and 19 of the Act of 1985 otiose. Suffice it to state, we are not impressed by the said plea, as under Section 25 of the Act, the Chairman is expressly vested with the power to transfer cases from one Bench of the Tribunal to another.”

The Delhi High Court set aside the orders issued on March 2, 2023, and March 27, 2023, by the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal. It directed the Chairman to reconsider the Transfer Petitions with a focus on providing well-reasoned and speaking orders. Until new decisions are reached, no proceedings will take place in the affected cases.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency and fairness in administrative actions, even when involving transfers of cases, and underlines the necessity for reasoned decisions to maintain the integrity of the process.

Date of Decision: 09.10.2023

State of Bihar and Ors.  vs Amit Lodha and Ors.

                   

[gview file="https://lawyerenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/9-Oct-2023-State_Bihar_Vs_Amit_Lodha.pdf"]

Similar News