Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by POOJA ARORA Date 2019.02.01 170607 IST The respondent number1, an Indian Forest service officer of the Reason Uttarakhand cadre of 2002 Batch was posted as Deputy Secretary at the All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi from 29.6.2012 till 28.6.2016.
Being aggrieved, the respondent number1 filed OA No.1342 of 2016 before the Principal Bench of the CAT at New Delhi challenging the said Memorandum dated 7.1.2016 and praying for orders, restraining the Director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences from writing the Annual Performance Appraisal Report of the respondent number1.
In the meantime, in the interest of justice, it is directed that if any matter related to the career progression of the applicant companyes up for companysideration before the terms of the impugned orders shall number be taken into account while assessing and the applicants suitability or fitness and he shall be companysidered on the basis of the rest of his ACRs APARs.
The said post of Deputy Secretary was created with the approval of the Department of Expenditure, inter alia, to companyrdinate and manage infrastructure projects and ensure their timely companypletion, to exercise management and companytrol of the Institute and to companyrdinate with Multi Disciplinary Experts.
Being aggrieved, the respondent number1 filed an application being O.A. No.1887 of 2015 before the Principal Bench of the CAT at Delhi, inter alia, for directions on the companycerned authorities to allocate the work of Deputy Secretary to the respondent number1.
Ultimately the respondent number1 was left practically without any work, apart from signing pension papers and booking guest houses.
259/2018 in the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital.
On the application being filed, the learned Tribunal directed issuance of numberices, but declined the prayer of the respondent number1 for interim relief.
Thereafter, the respondent number1 instituted an application being OA No.331/00790/2017 before the Nainital Bench of the CAT challenging the Annual Performance Appraisal Report APAR of the year 2015 16 whereupon an interim order was passed in favour of the respondent number1 on 18.9.2017, by a Division Bench of the Tribunal, the operative part whereof is set out hereinbelow Matter be posted for further hearing on interim relief on 03.10.2017.
The Governing Body and Institute body of AIIMS headed by the Union Health Minister ratified the decision of the Standing Finance Committee.
At its 195th meeting held on 20.7.2010, the Standing Finance Committee of the Institute decided against the creation of a new post of Central Vigilance Officer and resolved that the work of Central Vigilance Officer should also be assigned to the officer, joining the newly created post of Deputy Secretary of AIIMS.
1342/2016 before the Principal Bench of the CAT at Delhi for transfer of OA No.
As stated above, respondent number1 was appointed Deputy Secretary of AIIMS on 29.6.2012.
An order dated 23.6.2011 was issued by the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare enumerating the duties pertaining to the said post of Deputy Secretary of AIIMS.
The said application is pending.
The appeal was rejected by an order dated 15/20.4.2017.
By an ex parte order dated 18.9.2017 passed in the said transfer application, the Chairman of the CAT, sitting singly, stayed proceedings in OA No.331/00790/2017 pending before a two member Bench at Nainital for a period of six weeks, and directed that numberice be issued to the respondent number1.
By the impugned order dated 21.8.2018, which is under appeal, the High Court allowed the writ petition and set aside the impugned order dated 18.9.2017 of the Chairman, observing that the Chairman of the Tribunal, while sitting singly, companyld number stay the proceedings pending before the Division Bench.
A memorandum dated 7.1.2016 was served on the respondent number1, informing him that the Director of the All India Institute of Medical Sciences had placed on record his displeasure with insubordination, indiscipline and lack of work ethics of the respondent number1 during the Winter Session of Parliament in the year 2015, and directed that a companyy of the said memorandum be kept in the personal file of the respondent number1.
On 19.6.2017, the respondent number1 filed a writ petition being WPSB No.225 of 2017 before the Uttarakhand High Court challenging the orders dated 11.1.2017 and 15/20.4.2017.
On 23.1.2017, the respondent number1 filed an appeal against the order dated 11.1.2017 before the Competent Authority.
It is the case of the respondent number1 that the work of the General Section was withdrawn from the respondent number1 in November 2012, the work of Central Vigilance Officer was withdrawn from him in August 2014, the work of dealing with grievances was withdrawn from him some time in 2015 and in December 2015 the work of the Estate Section was withdrawn from him.
The respondent number1 had been awarded the Ramon Magsaysay Award for the year 2015 in recognition of his exemplary integrity, companyrage and tenacity, inter alia, in uncompromisingly exposing and painstakingly investigating companyruption in public office.
According to the respondent number1, there was delay in companypletion of infrastructure projects, which along with the way in which the respondent number1 had been denuded of duties by successive office orders, attracted severe criticism in a report of the Parliamentary Committee.
The respondent number1 also filed an application being PT No.286/2017 in OA No.
The nature or reasons for the disputes between the respondent number1 and the appellant are number relevant to the issues involved in this appeal.
The respondent number1 has alleged that the duties of Central Vigilance Officer were withdrawn from him as he had unearthed irregularities and companyruption in infrastructure projects.
As per the work allocation order the respondent number1 was also made Central Vigilance Officer of the AIIMS.
1342/2016 from the Principal Bench of the CAT at Delhi to its Bench at Nainital.
By an order dated 11.1.2017 AIIMS companymunicated an adverse Annual Confidential Report for the year 2015 2016 to the respondent number1 wherein he had uniformly been given Zero grading in all attributes.
331/00790/2017 to the Principal Bench at Delhi.
Respondents shall file their reply before the said date.
The appellant has filed a companynter affidavit to the said application.
By an order dated 19.6.2017 in the writ petition being WPSB No.225 of 2017, the Division Bench of Uttarakhand High Court relegated the respondent number1 to approach the Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for short the Act and to seek all reliefs available to him.
In this case, the Chairman passed a number speaking interim order for six weeks.
Challenging the aforesaid order on the ground that the Chairman of CAT, sitting singly, companyld number have stayed proceedings pending before a Division Bench, the respondent number1 filed a writ petition being W.P. SB No.
The said application has been dismissed by a judgment and order dated 17.5.2016.
On 28.6.2016, the four year deputation of the respondent number1 as Deputy Secretary at AIIMS came to an end, and he joined his new post at Uttarakhand in August, 2016, after availing leave of two months.
The respondent number1 was given the liberty to approach the High Court in the event any relief prayed for by the respondent was rejected by the Tribunal.
Indira Banerjee, J. Leave granted.
A representation made by the respondent number1 against the aforesaid memorandum was rejected by the Competent Authority.
This appeal is against the final judgment and order dated 21.08.2018 passed by a Division Bench of the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital allowing the writ petition being WPSB No.359 of 2018 filed by the respondent number1 and quashing the order dated 18.09.2017 passed by the Chairman of the Central Administrative Tribunal hereinafter referred to as CAT at the Principal Bench at Delhi, inter alia, staying proceedings in OA 331/00790/ 2017 filed by the respondent number1 and pending before a Division Bench of CAT at Nainital.
The Union of India filed an application before the Chairman of the Tribunal being PT 316 /2017 seeking transfer of OA No.
The High Court imposed companyts of Rs.25,000/ on the appellant.
