Tribunal implementation powers upheld where later directions merely clarified and enforced an earlier final order, not a fresh adjudication.

A tribunal may issue clarificatory or implementation directions to give effect to its final order where the later directions do not alter that order but only secure its proper execution. Here, the earlier order had attained finality and the subsequent miscellaneous applications were filed to implement it under the Administrative Tribunals Act and the Procedure Rules. The later directions were treated as aid to execution, not as a fresh or inconsistent adjudication, because the department had misconstrued the original directions. The contention that the tribunal had become functus officio was rejected, and the challenge to the implementation orders failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal lacked jurisdiction to pass the impugned implementation orders on the ground of functus officio, and whether the orders merely clarified and implemented the earlier final order without travelling beyond it.

Analysis: The earlier order of the Tribunal had attained finality as it was not challenged. The subsequent miscellaneous applications were filed for implementation of that order under Section 27 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 read with Rule 24 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987. The Tribunal found that the department had misconstrued the earlier directions and had adopted a shortcut method instead of properly implementing them. The later directions were treated as clarificatory and as being in aid of execution of the already final order, not as a fresh or inconsistent adjudication. In these circumstances, the contention that the Tribunal had become functus officio was rejected.

Conclusion: The Tribunal had jurisdiction to issue the impugned implementation directions, and the challenge to those orders failed.

Final Conclusion: The Original Petition was dismissed since the impugned orders were treated as proper implementation and clarification of the earlier final order, with no jurisdictional error established.

Ratio Decidendi: A tribunal may issue clarificatory or implementation directions to give effect to its final order when the later directions do not alter that order but only ensure its proper execution.

---