2019 (7) TMI 1231 - HC - Indian Laws

Enhancement of daily wages from 1.1.2006 as per the recommendations of the 6th Central Pay Commission - Rule 7 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Rules of Practice, 1993 - HELD THAT - Prima facie, we are satisfied that the requisite documents were not filed by the petitioner in compliance of Rule 7 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Rules of Practice, 1993 and therefore, the finding arrived at by the tribunal appears to be justified - We have also gone through the Annexure-6 as annexed with the petition and observe that the same is simply on a plain paper without having any details about the office of the union or the office bearers of the said union. The Annexure-6 does not inspire confidence in us about the veracity and authenticity of the same. The present writ petition being devoid of merit, is hereby dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to the judgment dated 24.08.2018 and 27.09.2018 passed by the Tribunal.

Analysis:
The writ petition was filed against the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal regarding the enhancement of daily wages for casual labors of the Income Tax Department. The Tribunal found that the proper authorization was not obtained to file the Original Application on behalf of the Association, leading to a dismissal of the application. The President of the Association signed the authorization without the consent of the members, causing prejudice. A cost of ?50,000 was imposed on the President for filing the OA without proper authorization. The Tribunal held that the applications were not maintainable but allowed individuals to file under specific rules. A review petition was also dismissed.

Further Analysis:
In the writ petition challenging the Tribunal's orders, the petitioner argued that the members authorized the President through a resolution to represent them legally. However, the respondent pointed out that a similar order in another case had been dismissed by the Court, indicating finality. The Court noted non-compliance with Rule 7 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Rules of Practice, 1993, and lack of confidence in the authenticity of the authorization document. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision due to the lack of merit in the writ petition and the finality of previous judgments on similar issues.

This detailed analysis covers the issues raised in the legal judgment, the Tribunal's findings, the arguments presented in the writ petition, and the Court's decision based on compliance with rules and previous judgments.