of India dated 11th Feb. 1982 and he was requested to inform the Home Department regarding steps taken.
The Tribunal dismissed all the three applications and hence these appeals.
Three applications filed before the Tribunal by the Electricity Employment Union, Shri Bal Krishan and shri Harjinder Singh Brar were disposed of by the companymon judgment as the question of fact and law were same.
The Punjab State Electricity Board companytinued to function in the areas in which it was functioning before the reorganisation of the State of Punjab.
The Tribunal did number accept the said companytentions and held that by virtue of the provisions of the Act their services were allotted to the Board and were working on deputation under the Union Territory of Chandigarh.
Subsequently a new State Elactricity Board for shortt Board was companystituted by the successor State of Punjab and it is number disputed that the members of the appellant Electricity Employment Union and other two appeallants were employeees of the erstwhile Board.
Our attention was drawn by Mr. Rao to the letter dated 11th Feb. 1982 from the Ministry of Home Affairs to the Home Secretary, Union Territory Chandigarh.
of India companyveyed the views of the Ministry of Law, Govt.
By the Punjab Recoganization Act, 1966 for short the Act the erstwhile State of Punjab was reorganised and the sucessor States were States of Punjab and Haryana, Union Territories of Chandigarh and Himachal Pradesh, which subsequently became a State.
of India that employeees of the erstwhile State of Punjab allocated to the successor States including the Union Territory of Chandigarh were wrongly treated as on deputation as they were to be absorbed by the administration as employees of the Union Territory of Chandigarh.
LITTTTTTJ JUDGMENT PHUKAN.
By this letter only the views of the Union territory administration were sought for.
Our attention was also drawn to the letter dated 14th Oct. 1983 from the Home Secretary, Union Territory Administration, Chandigarh to Chief Engineer by which attention of the Chief Engineer was drawn to the above letter of the Govt.
By this letter, the Govt.
J. These three appeals are directed against the judgment dated 17th July 1995 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh.
