AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Manishh Garg, Member (J)
In the present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the appllicant has praayed for the following relieff(s):
“i. Pass an order to set aside the orders dated 24.04.20255 passed by the Respondent No. 3 as weell as the order dated 25.04.20255.
ii. Pass any other order/s which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper, under the circuumstances of the case.
iii. Pass order to award the litigation cost bared by the Appplicant.”
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that ann advance coppy of the present O.A. has been circulated to Mr. Sanjay Katiyal, Standing Counsel of the respondents.
The matter was passed over awaiting response, if any, on behhalf of the respondents. Hoowever, there is no represenntation on behhalf of the respondents, even in the revised call.
An application for interim relief has been souught. The Registry has raised an objectiion as the applicant has not filed the O. A. in a prescribed format as per the Schedule of CAT Rules.
Considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the casse, the said objections are dispensed with. Registry is directed to asssign the number more particularly in light of the facct that the appplicant is a physically disabled person.
Learned counsel for thee applicant presses for urgent interim relief, which reads as under:
“It is, therefore, most respeectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may graciously be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the order dated 24.04.2025 passed byy the respondent no. 3 as well as the order dated 25.04.2025 (Annexure no. 1 of the writ petition) or may be pleased to pass such furthher order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the casee, otherwise petitioner shall suffer irreparable loss and injury”
Highlighting the facts of the case, learned counsel for the appplicant has drawn our attenttion to the fact that the Honn’ble High Court of Uttarakhand, vide order dated 01.05.2025 in WPSB No.127/2025, passed the following order:
“5. We find substance in the said submission.
Since petitioner can appproach the Tribunal under the aforesaid Act, therefore, we refuse to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition is, accordingly, dismissed on the ground ofalternate remedy with liberty to petitioner to approach the appropriate forumm.
Mr. Vikas Pande, learneed counsel for the respondents assures that for a period of one week, status quo as of now shall be maintained, qua the posting of the petitioner.”
Pursuant to the direction of the Hon’ble High Court of Utttarakhand, the applicant hass approached this Tribunal.
It is the case of the appplicant that the applicant is a 50% dissabled person and moreovver, a detailed representation dated 01.05.2025 (Annexure A-6 (colly)) has been preferreed by the appplicant to the competent authority regarding Transfer Order datted 24.04.2025, after passinng of the order of the Hon’ble High Court of Uttarrakhand on 01.05.2025.
In view of the peculiar facts and circumstances off the case, we dispose of the present O.A. at the admission stage by directing the respondents to dispose o f the pending representation of the appplicant dated 01.05.2025 (Annexure A-6 (colly)) by passing a reaasoned and speaking order taking a holistic view in light of the proovisions of the Right of Disability Act within a periodd of thirty dayys from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. Till succh time, the impugned ordeers dated 24.04.2025 and 25.04.2025 shaall be kept in abeyance. Needless to say, the opportunity of heaaring shall also be accorded to the applicant.
Accordingly, the present O.A. is disposed of with the afooresaid directions at thee admission stage. All pending appplications, if any, shall also stand disposed of. No costss.