Mubashir Alam
Srinagar, Jul 19: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has imposed a fine of Rs one lakh on senior IAS officer Ashok Kumar Parmar, who had filed a petition against Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha and senior IAS officers of J&K administration and Union Government over his service matters, saying that it can be safely said that the application has been filed just to harass them.
The quasi-judicial body dismissed the petition filed by Parmar, saying that LG cannot be impleaded as party in the suit as per the Constitution of India. “From the perusal of record, it transpires that the applicant has impleaded the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor of Union Territory of Jammu & Kashmir by name, which is not permissible in view of Article 361 (4) of Constitution of India,” the Tribunal said.
“It is quite astonishing to note that the applicant, a senior IAS officer with extensive knowledge of Constitution of India and its laws, proceeded to file original application seeking relief against the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor, who has been bestowed with immunity under Article 361 of the Constitution of India. More regretful is the action of Ashutosh Khanna, Advocate representing the applicant, in this case, who as an Advocate had the duty to correctly advice the applicant. It can be safely said that the instant O.A. has been filed just to harass the respondents,” it further said.
Parmar had filed the petition seeking reliefs regarding his service matters like annual confidential report and empanelment. He had impleaded LG Manoj Sinha, Rajiv Gauba( cabinet secretary), Ajay Kumar Bhalla (Union Home Secretary), S. Radha Chauhan( Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training), J&K Chief Secretary, Rajeev Rai Bhatnagar( Advisor to Lieutenant Governor), Shaleen Kabra (Financial Commissioner, Jal Shakti Department and Financial Commissioner Revenue) and Dr. Arun Kumar Mehta, ex-chief Secretary, J&K) as respondents in the matter.
Citing Article 361 of the Constitution of India, the Tribunal said that civil suit cannot be instituted against LG without giving him notice two months prior to filing of the suit.
“When considering the specifics of the case in hand, a straightforward interpretation of Article 361 of the Constitution of India makes the legal point evident that no civil proceedings can be instituted against the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor, until the expiration of two months next after notice in writing has been delivered to the Hon’ble Lieutenant Governor stating the nature of the proceedings, the cause of action therefore, the name, description and place of residence of the party by whom such proceedings are to be instituted and the relief which he claims. The applicant has failed to produce any proof or evidence, that such a notice has been made and delivered. Hence, this Tribunal is not inclined to grant any relief to the applicant to this extent,” the Tribunal said.
It also said that it is not clear how the applicant can claim reliefs related to his service conditions from the respondents in their private capacity. “Secondly, it is seen from the records, that the applicant has impleaded all the respondents by their name in the O.A. and the applicant is seeking relief concerned with his ACR and his empanelment as Additional Secretary and Secretary from the respondents in their private capacity. It is not clear as to how the applicant can claim reliefs related to his service conditions from the respondents in their private capacity. It is also seen that the applicant has unnecessarily impleaded Cabinet Secretary of India and Secretary, DoPT as party in the O.A. by name, though no allegations have been made by the applicant against them in the O.A,” the Tribunal said.
It added that Parmar has not impleaded necessary parties in the case.
“Lastly, it is seen that the applicant has not impleaded the necessary parties viz Union of India and State of Jammu & Kashmir in the O.A. Hence, the O.A. is liable to be dismissed on the ground of non-joinder of necessary parties,” reads the order.
