Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2008 DIGILAW 797 (JHR)

Birsa Oraon v. Union of India

2008-07-23

D.K.SINHA, M.Y.EQBAL

body2008
Judgment M. Y. Eqbal, J.-Heard Mrs. M.M. Pal. learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India and the learned counsel appearing for the State of Jharkhand. 2. In this 'Public Interest Litigation, the petitioner sought direction for establishment of permanent Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at Ranchi for Jharkhand State considering the work load and further, for a direction to provide proper accommodation for the Bench at Ranchi preferably in the premises of the District Consumers Forum. 3. Pursuant to the order passed by this Court, a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3 wherein it is stated that the instant writ petition is third round of litigation to establish a permanent Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal at Ranchi. In the earlier writ petition being C.W.J.C. No. 3988 of 1992(R), a Bench of the Patna High Court had directed that the matter may be placed before the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal so that he may take up the matter with the appropriate authorities. Further direction was issued for holding Circuit Bench at Ranchi. In the contempt case arising out of that order, the Government of India in its reply submitted that the case was examined by the Government and it was found that there were only a limited number of cases pending before the Patna Bench of the Tribunal which pertain to the State of Jharkhand and a decision was taken that a Circuit Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal is sufficient to take care of this much work load, as there were only 125 cases pending. In the subsequent application being C.M.P. No. 137 of 2004, it was ordered that the sitting of the Tribunal shall be held at Ranchi for at least 6 days in a month, but that can be held at a stretch by the Tribunal. It is stated that the Circuit Bench is being held at Ranchi in H.E.C. Training Institute Campus, Dhurwa, Ranchi. It is further stated that considering the pendency of the cases, the Government has taken a decision not 10 have an exclusive regular Bench at Ranchi in the State of Jharkhand. 4. Article 323-A of the Constitution of India confers jurisdiction to the Tribunal to establish separate Administrative Tribunal for each State and/or for two or more States, depending upon various factors. 4. Article 323-A of the Constitution of India confers jurisdiction to the Tribunal to establish separate Administrative Tribunal for each State and/or for two or more States, depending upon various factors. Accordingly, the State Government has no role in the establishment of permanent Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal for the State of Jharkhand. Admittedly, the total pendency of cases pertaining to the Jharkhand State varies from 150 to 400. We are, therefore, of the view that for the present, it is not a fit case where a mandamus can be issued directing the respondents for establishment of permanent Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal in the State of Jharkhand. 5. For the reasons aforesaid, no relief can be granted to the petitioner. This writ application is dismissed.