Punjab and Haryana High Court Quashes State Election Commission's Cancellation of Panchayat Elections in Punjab J&K High Court Quashes FIR Against Bajaj Allianz, Asserts Insurance Dispute Shouldn’t Be Criminalized Sole Eyewitness's Testimony Insufficient to Sustain Murder Conviction: Madras High Court Acquits Three Accused in Murder Case Presumption of Innocence is Strengthened in Acquittal Cases; Appellate Courts Must Respect Trial Court Findings Unless Clearly Perverse: Delhi High Court NDPS | Physical or Virtual Presence of Accused is Mandatory for Extension of Detention Beyond 180 Days: Andhra Pradesh HC Bombay High Court Quashes Suspension of Welfare Benefits for Construction Workers Due to Model Code of Conduct Section 131 of Electricity Act Does Not Mandate Finalized Transfer Scheme Before Bidding: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Privatization of UT Chandigarh Electricity Department Revenue Authorities Must Safeguard State Property, Not Indulge in Land Scams: Madhya Pradesh High Court Proposed Amendment Clarifies, Not Changes, Cause of Action: High Court of Jharkhand emphasizing the necessity of amendment for determining real questions in controversy. EWS Candidates Selected on Merit Should Not Be Counted Towards Reserved Quota: P&H High Court Finance Act 2022 Amendments Upheld: Supreme Court Validates Retrospective Customs Authority for DRI Mere Breach Of Contract Does Not Constitute A Criminal Offense Unless Fraudulent Intent Exists From The Start: Delhi High Court Anticipatory Bail Not Intended As A Shield To Avoid Lawful Proceedings In Cases Of Serious Crimes: Allahabad High Court Rajasthan High Court Grants Bail in Light of Prolonged Detention and Delays in Trial U/S 480 BNSS Provision Bombay High Court Orders Disclosure of Candidates' Marks in Public Recruitment Process: Promotes Transparency under RTI Act Maintenance | Father's Duty to Support Daughters Until Self-Sufficiency or Marriage: Karnataka High Court Designation of Arbitration 'Venue' as 'Seat' Confers Exclusive Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Rules in Dubai Arbitration Case Corporate Veil Shields Company Assets from Partition as Joint Family Property: Madras High Court Principal Employers Liable for ESI Contributions for Contract Workers, But Assessments Must Be Fair and Account for Eligibility: Kerala High Court Government Entities Must be Treated Equally to Private Parties in Arbitration Proceedings: Supreme Court Supreme Court Allows Resumption of Disciplinary Inquiry Against Storekeeper in Ration Misappropriation Case

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