# Rajendra Prasad v. Union of India and others - **Citation:** (2001) 1 ILRA 364 - **Court:** High Court of Judicature at Allahabad - **Decided:** 2001 - **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/rajendra-prasad-v-union-of-india-and-others-39626 - **Pages:** 2 ## Text 1All] Rajendra Prasad V. Union of India and others 364 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 &,9,/ 6,'( &,9,/ 6,'( '$7(' $//$+$%$' '$7(' $//$+$%$' %()25( %()25( 7+( +21·%/( 6 5 6,1*+ - 7+( +21·%/( 6 5 6,1*+ - 7+( +21·%/( ' 5 &+$8'+$5< - 7+( +21·%/( ' 5 &+$8'+$5< - &LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI 5DMHQGUD 3UDVDG «3HWLWLRQHU 9HUVXV 8QLRQ RI ,QGLD WKURXJK *HQHUDO 0DQDJHU DQG RWKHUV «5HVSRQGHQWV &RXQVHO IRU WKH $SSHOODQW 6KUL 0 ' 0LVKUD 6KUL 'LOHHS 0LVKUD &RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV 6KUL $ . 5DL $GPLQLVWUDWLYH 7ULEXQDO $FW 6HFWLRQ ± DV DPHQGHG E\ $FW 1R RI ± -XULVGLFWLRQ RI ,QGXVWULDO 7ULEXQDO /DERXU &RXUW RU DQ\ DXWKRULW\ FRQVWLWXWHG XQGHU WKH ,QGXVWULDO 'LVSXWH $FW KDV SRZHU WR DGMXGLFDWH WKH PDWWHU UHJDUGLQJ UHFUXLWPHQW DQG VXFK VHUYLFH PDWWHU DV PD\ EH RWKHUZLVH IDOOLQJ ZLWKLQ WKH MXULVGLFWLRQ RI &$7 ± DPHQGHG SURYLVLRQ JLYHV FKRLFH WR WKH OLWLJDQW ZRUNPDQ HLWKHU WR DSSURDFK EHIRUH WKH &$7 RU EHIRUH WKH ODERXU FRXUW +HOG ± 3DUD 7KH DPHQGHG SURYLVLRQ JLYHV D FKRLFH WR WKH OLWLJDQW ZRUNPDQ HLWKHU WR DSSURDFK WKH &HQWUDO $GPLQLVWUDWLYH 7ULEXQDO RU WKH /DERXU &RXUW DQG LQ FDVH WKH OLWLJDQW KDV FKRVHQ WKH IRUXP RI WKH &HQWUDO $GPLQLVWUDWLYH 7ULEXQDO LW FDQQRW VDLG WKDW WKH DSSOLFDWLRQ LV QRW PDLQWDLQDEOH By the Court 1. Heard Sri M.D. Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri A.K. Rai, learned counsel representing respondents and perused the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad thereby holding that the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (in short the 'Act') filed by the petitioner is not maintainable. 2. Admittedly, the petitioner comes within the purview of "Workman" within the meaning of the term as defined in Section 2(z) of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947. The question is whether an application under section 19 of the Act is maintainable before the Central Administrative Tribunal and it has jurisdiction to entertain the application concerning services matters of the workman. Section 2 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 enumerates the matter is respect of which the provisions of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 will have no application. Clause (b) of Section 2, as it stood before its omission by Act No. 19 of 1986 with effect from 01.11.85, reads thus "any person governed by the provisions of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) in regard to such matters in respect of which he is so governed". After omission of Clause (b) from section 2 of the Act with effect from 01.11.85 the provision of the Act became applicable in relation to any matter is respect of which a workman is governed by the provisions of the Industrial disputes, 1947. The Section 28 of the Act was also amended by the self same Act 19 of 1986 where by jurisdiction of all Courts "except the Supreme Court; or any Industrial Tribunal, Labour Court or other Authority constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947 (14 of 1947) or any other corresponding law for the time being in force," has been ousted. As a result of the amendment in Section 28, it INDIAN LAW REPORTS ALLAHABAD SERIES [2001 365 has now become possible "for any Industrial Tribunal Labour Court or other Authority constituted under the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947" to exercise any jurisdiction power, authority in regard to recruitment or matters concerning such recruitment and such service matters as may be otherwise falling within the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 as they stand amended by Act 19 of 1986 leads to the conclusion that though the workman can approach the Industrial Tribunal, Labour Court or the authority constituted under the provision of the Industrial Tribunal Act,1947, it cannot be said that a petition under Section 19 of the Act is not maintainable before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The amended provision gives a choice to the litigant - workman either to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal or the Labour Court and in case the litigant has chosen the forum of the Central Administrative Tribunal, it cannot said, that the application is not maintainable. The view taken by the Central Administrative Tribunal that the application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 filed by the petitioner was not maintainable before it, cannot be sustained. The writ petition, in the circumstances, succeeds and is allowed. The impugned order of Tribunal is set aside. The matter is remitted to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad bench, Allahabad for taking decision on merit. 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 25,*,1$/ -85,6',&7,21 &,9,/ 6,'( &,9,/ 6,'( '$7(' $//$+$%$' '$7(' $//$+$%$' %()25( %()25( 7+( +21·%/( 23 * 7+( +21·%/( 23 *$5* - $5* - &LYLO 0LVF :ULW 3HWLWLRQ 1R RI 6UL 3DUGHHS .XPDU 5DVWRJL «3HWLWLRQHU 9HUVXV 7KH ;9, $GGLWLRQDO 'LVWULFW -XGJH 0HHUXW DQG RWKHUV «5HVSRQGHQWV &RXQVHO IRU WKH $SSHOODQW 6KUL 5DMHVK 7DQGRQ 6KUL $QXUDJ .KDQQD &RXQVHO IRU WKH 5HVSRQGHQWV 6KUL $VKLVK .XPDU 6LQJK 6KUL 5DYL .LUDQ -DLQ 6UL 3XVKNDU &RQVWLWXWLRQ RI ,QGLD $UWLFOH UHDG ZLWK 83 8UEDQ %XLOGLQJV 5HJXODWLRQ RI OHWWLQJ 5HQW DQG (YLFWLRQ $FW 6LDSRZHUV XQGHU ZKHUH WR EH H[HUFLVHG +HOG ±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