TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1998 (8) TMI 542
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ead of the Department of Surgical gastroenterology for about five years during which period he had acquired 'Special training/experience' in the said subject. 4. The Orissa Public Service Commission caused advertisement No. 27 of 1991/92 inviting applications for the post of Junior Teacher (Lecturer) in several disciplines including Surgical Gastroenterology. The last date for receipt of applications was 15.05.92. The minimum educational qualification was prescribed as under (a) A candidate must have obtained a post Graduate Degree in speciality or any other equivalent degree or qualification prescribed by the I.M.C./Dental Council of India as the case may be for all the above posts. (b) For the post of surgical gastroenterology, candidates possessing M.S. (general surgical) Degree with 2 years special training in surgical gastroenterology from the institution recognised by the M.C.I. are eligible. 5. Even before the issue of advertisement the Health and Family Welfare Department of the Government of Orissa sought clarification regarding qualification for appointment to the post of lecturer in the Department of Gastroenterology vide letter no. 43633/Hd 26.12.90. The Medica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d the name of a suitable candidate from the reserve list. On 30.08.93, the Commission recommended the name of the pititioner for appointment. 8. At that stage one candi charan Routray in his capacity as General Secretary, Cuttack Surakhya Committee filed O.A. 1439/93 before the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Bhubaneswar. Another application O.A. 1630/93 was filed by the Cuttack surakhya Committee through Jitendra Kumar Mishra before the same Bench. A third application was filed before the Cuttack Bench in O.A. No. 1614 (c)/94 by one Nibas Chandra Mishra. The prayers in all the three applications are identical. They are for (i) quashing the order of the Government dated 25.08.93 creating one more post of Junior Teacher, (ii) debarring the petitioner from being appointed as Junior Teacher and (iii) preventing the Government from appointing any candidate as Lecturer without requisite qualification and training in the super speciality. The averment in all the three applications were almost identical. The substance of the allegations was that the petitioner did not possess the qualifications prescribed for the post of Lecturer and the Government in or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... under-staffed and that it was manned only by a Professor till Dr. Mohapatra joined as Lecturer, points to the conclusion that it was not equipped with adequate facilities for imparting special training. No doubt Dr. Sahoo has acquired sufficient practical experience by assisting the Head of Deptt. for a long period of six years and the list of publications he has to his credit, as given in his counter, would support such a view. But it cannot be said that he has acquired the special training indicated by the IMC in their letter since the SCB Medical College has not been notified by the IMC as a recognized institution for imparting such training in that super speciality. 10. On the above reasoning the Tribunal granted the second prayer of the applicants and restrained the appointment of the petitioner as lecturer. The Tribunal refused to quash the Government order creating the post and rejected the first prayer. The Tribunal directed the Health and Family Welfare Department to take appropriate steps for filling up the post after complying with the relevant statutory provisions and issuing a fresh advertisement through the Public Service Commission. The petitioner has challenged ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ieved. Would it be otherwise and locus standi being determined purely on the axis of Section 19, the purpose of creating the Service Tribunal would seemingly be frustrated. It may therefore crop up that the above observations of K. Ramaswamy, J may attract an exception. In any case, the matter is important in order to define jurisdiction of the tribunal and therefore in the fitness of things, should be placed before a three Member Bench. We therefore direct these special leave petitions to be heard by a three-Member Bench." 12. We have heard counsel on both sides at length. Several rulings have been relied on by them though in none of them, the questing arose directly for consideration. The question as to maintainability of a public interest litigation before the Tribunal depends for its answer on the provisions of the Act. The Tribunal having been created by the Act, the scope and extent of its jurisdiction have to be determined by interpreting the provisions thereof. In S.P. Sampath Kumar versus State of A.P. (1987) 1 S.C.C. 124 it was held that the Tribunal constituted under the Act were effective substitutes to the High Courts in the scheme of administration of justice an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r other authority within the territory of India or under the control of the Govt. of India or by any corporation (or society) owned or controlled by the Government; of (b) by an officer, committee or other body or agency of the Government or a local or other authority or corporation (or society) referred to in clause (a) ******************* ******************* S.19 (4) Where an application has been admitted by a Tribunal under sup-section (3), every proceeding under the relevant service rules as to redressal of grievances in relation to the subject matter of such application pending immediately before such admission shall abate and save as otherwise directed by the Tribunal, no appeal or representation in relation to such matter shall thereafter be entertained under such rules. 15. Section 20 provides that the Tribunal shall not ordinarily admit an application unless it is satisfied that the applicant had availed of all the remedies available to him under the relevant rules. Section 21 provides for a period of limitation for approaching the Tribunal. A perusal of the above provisions shows that the Tribunal can be approached only by 'persons aggrieved' by an order as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he same can be made only by a person aggrieved by any order pertaining to any matter within the jurisdiction of the Tribunal. We have already seen that the work 'order' has been defined in the explanation to sub-s. (1) of Section 19 so that all matters referred to in Section 3 (q) as service matters could be brought before the Tribunal. It in that context, Sections 14 and 15 are read, there is no doubt that a total stranger to the concerned service cannot make an application before the Tribunal. If public interest litigations at the instance of strangers are allowed to be entertained by the Tribunal the very object of speedy disposal of service matters would get defeated. 19. Our attention has been drawn to a judgement of the Orissa Administrative Tribunal in Smt. Amitarani Khuntia Versus State of Orissa 1996. (1) OLR (CSR)-2. The Tribunal after considering the provisions of the Act held that a private citizen or a stranger having no existing right to any post and not intrinsically concerned with any service matter is not entitled to approach the Tribunal. The following passage in the judgement is relevant: "....A reading of the aforesaid provisions would mean that an applica....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pointing the petitioner as lecturer. Hence, the applications filed by the respondents cannot be considered to be quo warranto. 21. In the result, we answer the first question in the negative and hold that the Administrative Tribunal constituted under the Act cannot entertain a public interest litigation at the instance of a total stranger. 22. Turning to the second question, even the facts set out by us earlier would show that the petitioner satisfied the requisite qualifications prescribed for the post of lecturer. The only contention urged is that the petitioner did not have two years special training in Surgical Gastroenterology from an institution recognised by MCI for giving special training. There is no merit in the contention. The list of recognised Medical Colleges in India published by the MCI contains the name of S.C.R. Medical College, Cuttack in Sl. No. 80. Thus the said college is a recognised institution. The interpretation that the institution should be recognised for giving special training is erroneous. There is no such requirement in the rule. 23. Even the Tribunal has found that the petitioner had acquired sufficient practical experience by assisting the....