Central Administrative Tribunal: powers and jurisdiction
Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT): Powers and Jurisdiction
Introduction:
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) was established under Article 323A of the Indian Constitution through the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. It was created to provide speedy and specialized adjudication of service-related disputes for Central Government employees and certain other public sector employees.
Powers and Jurisdiction of CAT:
Jurisdiction:
CAT has exclusive jurisdiction over service matters related to:
Recruitment
Conditions of service
Promotions
Transfers
Disciplinary actions
Pay and allowances
Leave, pension, and retirement benefits of Central Government employees and employees of other specified bodies.
CAT does not have jurisdiction over:
Matters related to All India Services (IAS, IPS, etc.)
Officers under the Defence Services
Matters concerning wages and allowances not related to service conditions
Powers:
CAT exercises civil court powers under the Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), such as summoning witnesses, discovery of documents, and enforcing attendance.
CAT can issue directions, orders, or writs for enforcing rights relating to service matters.
CAT can review its own decisions within a prescribed period.
CAT has power to transfer cases between its benches.
CAT’s orders are binding but can be challenged only before the Supreme Court by way of Special Leave Petition under Article 136 of the Constitution.
Important Case Laws on CAT’s Powers and Jurisdiction:
1. Union of India v. Madan Mohan Singh (1976) AIR 1822
Supreme Court
Facts:
Before the establishment of CAT, service disputes were heard by administrative tribunals or courts. The case dealt with the powers of the tribunal under the new constitutional scheme.
Held:
The Supreme Court emphasized the need for a specialized forum like CAT to deal with service disputes promptly. It recognized that the CAT would have the power to provide effective relief to public servants.
Principle:
CAT’s establishment aims to reduce the burden of service cases in ordinary courts and provide speedy justice.
2. Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006) 4 SCC 1
Supreme Court
Facts:
The case involved regularization of services of temporary employees who claimed permanent employment based on prolonged service.
Held:
The Supreme Court held that CAT has the jurisdiction to decide questions relating to regularization and recruitment policy but cannot override statutory rules. It reinforced that CAT is the forum for service disputes but within the limits of law.
Principle:
CAT’s jurisdiction is wide but not unlimited. It must act within the statutory framework governing recruitment and service conditions.
3. State of Punjab v. Jaskaran Singh (2008) 13 SCC 35
Supreme Court
Facts:
This case dealt with CAT’s jurisdiction over punishment and disciplinary matters.
Held:
The Court held that CAT has the power to entertain service-related disciplinary matters except where such matters are entrusted exclusively to departmental authorities or tribunals by statute.
Principle:
CAT can adjudicate on disciplinary actions unless barred by specific law.
4. Secretary, Ministry of Defence v. Babita Puniya (2015) 4 SCC 765
Supreme Court
Facts:
The question was whether CAT has jurisdiction over defence service matters.
Held:
The Court clarified that CAT does not have jurisdiction over defence service matters as per Article 323A(3)(b) of the Constitution.
Principle:
Defence service disputes fall outside CAT’s jurisdiction, which is clearly demarcated by the Constitution.
5. V. Balakrishnan v. Union of India (1997) 8 SCC 383
Supreme Court
Facts:
This case dealt with the limitation period for filing an appeal before CAT and the powers of the tribunal in condoning delay.
Held:
The Court held that CAT has the power to condone delays in filing applications and appeals if sufficient cause is shown, recognizing its role in dispensing substantial justice.
Principle:
CAT’s procedural powers include flexibility in matters of limitation to ensure justice.
Summary of CAT’s Powers and Jurisdiction:
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Service matters of Central Government employees and specified bodies (not Defence or All India Services) |
| Powers | Civil court powers (summoning, enforcing attendance), issuing directions/orders, reviewing own decisions |
| Limitations | Cannot interfere with statutory rules, Defence services excluded |
| Appeal | Appeals against CAT decisions lie only with Supreme Court |
Conclusion:
CAT plays a vital role in efficiently resolving service disputes of Central Government employees by providing expert adjudication and reducing litigation burden on regular courts. However, its jurisdiction is statutory and limited, and it must operate within legal boundaries laid down by statutes and the Constitution.
RELATED Blog
0 comments