Review petition kept pending by CAT by repeated bench recons
yogesh thaware
(Querist) 11 August 2018
This query is : Resolved
I had filed a review petition in central administrative tribunal Bombay in August 2017 against my OA dismissal.when the review petition was filed one of the member (administrative) of the division bench who passed the OA dismissal judgement was transferred to chennai bench of CAT.A new administrative member then joined CAT bombay.one original member (judicial) was still available and was the chairman of CAT.since one member of the original bench was transferred the review application was heard by one original judicial member and newly appointed administrative member.I construed it as a reconstituted bench.notice was issued to respondents and review matter was heard with as many as seven hearing dates.The respondents filed only one reply after three hearings (they were absent during first three hearings).during these hearings the written orders specifically mentioned the corum with names of original judicial member and new administrative member.The judge(judicial) reserved the judgement in March 2018 hearing but he again dereserved it and pushed the matter for another date of july to rehear both the parties again because some citations judgements in support of review application were submitted by my lawyer in CAT office after hearing and the judge wanted it to be properly indexed with synopsis which I thought was a deliberate delay tactics of the learned judge as the respondent party lawyer has no submissions/objections/aversions to make.this was done despite of the fact that the respondent lawyer had nothing to say or add whenever judges asked for his response or version (he plainly admitted of no response and remained silent in every hearing). Please remember that this original judicial member of corum was on extension (he was suppose to retire in January 2018 itself). he knew that he may get retiring orders anytime once the central government appoints a new judicial member which is what exactly happened as his extension was ended in June and a new judicial member was appointed.when my review application came in July for final disposal (pl remember the respondent lawyer has still nothing to add or object) before this bench it refused to dispose off my review application and instead ordered to reconstitute the bench and rehear the matter again which I think is a pure harassment by tribunal.The administrative member(he is now chairman) who was a part of that courum who heard this review matter for seven hearings would again be a part of a reconstituted bench and would again rehear this matter which I think is ridiculous and atrocious and making a mockery of Justice system.The tribunal is making me to suffer as I have pointed out some serious flaws and errors in the OA judgement.The OA was disposed off within four months and the judgement of review petition is not being given on one pretext or the other from last twelve months. now a reconstituted bench wants to rehear it again.The tribunal should either dismiss it if it does not find any merit in my review petition or should allow it.by not doing anything it is simply blocking my road to approach high court.this is frustrating a petitioner in worst possible way.In my view the administrative member who was a part of the coroum who heard this review matter throught the seven hearings is legally empowered to pass any order (dismissal or allowing) and there is absolutely no need to reconstitute the bench again and rehear this matter again.please remember the administrative member would again be a part of this reconstituted bench and he wants to rehear it again when he has already heard it.This is very funny as the last written order of tribunal says "The review application was heard by another bench and hence bench needs to be reconstituted".This means that The administrative member who has signed this order and was a part of that corum who heard my review petition all throughout seven hearings doesn't consider himself to be a part of that bench at all.
The rule is very clear with regard to review petitions.A bench has to be reconstituted only when both the members of the original division bench cease to exist.the admistrative member who heard and was part of the corum how can he totally exclude himself from the review proceedings.
all legal experts kindly comment on my analysis and specially on the aspect of administrative members functional and legal power to pass any order on my review petition without reconstituting the bench further.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 12 August 2018
Too long a story, no time.
Contact, consult and engage a local prudent lawyer.
R.Ramachandran
(Expert) 12 August 2018
The whole trouble was because, your lawyer submitted some citations judgements in support of review application after hearing.
When the Review Application was not dismissed, but was heard in 7 hearings and was RESERVED for orders, there was no need whatsoever to submit citations, that too after hearing, to support the review application.
Having committed the mistake, you have no other go than to suffer the consequences.
Having committed the mistake yourself and your lawyers, it does not lie in your mouth to blame the Respondents as though it is their conspiracy to delay the matter!
Guest
(Expert) 12 August 2018
To be very frank, Tribunal is not making you suffer, but your own lawyer seems to be responsible for making you suffer due to ineffective presentation of your case and non-submission of citations timely. Moreover, not the citations, but merits of the case work well. In my view, citations are normally considered as the walking stick or crutches to help a lame person, when not able to stand or walk on the strength of his own, i.e., when a lawyer is unable to present merits of the case properly before the CAT or the court of law..
Judges have to be convinced on the merits of the case as well as the provisions of laws on the subject matter. Citations sometimes make even a simple as as a complicated case due to inapt handling of the case by the lawyer.
yogesh thaware
(Querist) 12 August 2018
My lawyers legal exposure has been very strong.he has assisted two attorney generals,four solicitar generals and almost all advocate generals in all state high courts.because of his high legal exposure I had complete faith and trust in him.even I was upset and shouted at him when matter got dereserved which I also considered as serious procedural lapse on his part.I paid lot of money to him and if I go by the opinions expressed in this forum then this was a serious procedural lapse on the part of my lawyer.should I demand refund of my money for faulty legal services ??.A lawyer may win or lose a case (in this case he did not even lose it he spoiled it)and asking for a refund by client may not be justified but this is commiting suicide, sheer stupidity and completly spoiling your own case and my lawyer doesn't deserves to be pardoned considering his vast legal experience.
Guest
(Expert) 12 August 2018
Really amazing, when very strong exposure of your lawyer and also long standing association with various legal celebrities, but still lost your case, had to file revision and still could not file citation before the judgment kept reserved!
Further, what you said is your personal issues with the lawyer to settle or not, nobody can advice you on such points.
Wish the best of luck to you.
yogesh thaware
(Querist) 13 August 2018
Thanks to all experts for sparing their valuable time and giving useful suggestions/opinions.
