Kerala High Court
J R Asha vs Union Of India on 3 May, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE EASWARAN S.
FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 13TH VAISAKHA, 1946
OP (CAT) NO. 76 OF 2024
AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 24.04.2024 IN OA NO.261 OF 2024 OF CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH
PETITIONER:
J R ASHA
AGED 49 YEARS
W/O K C SUBRAMANIAN HINDI OFFICER, OFFICE OF PRINCIPAL
ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (AUDIT-1) THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
RESIDING AT ASHADAM, SURYA 147 C, HORIZON ENCLAVE
PERURKADA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MOB: 9446160094,
PIN - 695005
BY ADVS.
U.BALAGANGADHARAN
BENNY GERVACIS (SR.)(K/524/1989)
RESPONDENTS:
1 UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF OFFICIAL
LANGUAGE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS NEW DELHI,
PIN - 110001
2 THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA,
DEEN DAYAL UPADHYA MARGH, NEW DELHI, PIN - 110011
3 THE PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (AUDIT-1)
KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033
4 THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR (IMPLEMENTATION)
DEPARTMENT OF OFFICIAL LANGUAGE MINISTRY OF HOME
AFFAIRS NDCC -II BUILDINGS, JAI SINGH ROAD NEW DELHI,
PIN - 110012
BY ADV T.K.SREEKALA
ADV.T.C.KRISHNA FOR R1 AND R4. SR.ADV.MAYANKUTTY MATHER
FOR R2,R3
THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.05.2024, THE
COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
OP (CAT) NO. 76 OF 2024 2
JUDGMENT
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN,J.
The petitioner says she is aggrieved by Ext.P2 order because, the
learned Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Ernakulam Bench, (CAT)
has refused to interdict the order impugned before it, but without citing
any reason.
2. Sri.Benny Gervacis, learned Senior Counsel, instructed by
Sri.U.Balagangadharan - learned counsel for the petitioner, tried to
impress upon us that, on account of the 'additional responsibilities' cast
upon his client, she would have to invest larger time on her duties, which
would cause irreparable prejudice to her daughter, who is autistic; and
also to herself, who is suffering from certain neurological issues. He added
that his client's father is suffering from Alzheimer disease, which is
progressing; and that if she is to work more then what she is presently
asked to, he would also be put to great prejudice.
3. Noticing the afore plea of the petitioner - though not being
completely relevant to the issue at hand - we indited the following order
on 30.04.2024:
"Smt.S.Parvathi Menon - learned counsel appears for respondents 2
and 3 and submits that she has instructed Sri.K.I.Mayankutty Mather -
learned Senior Counsel to appear.
2. Sri.P.C.Krishna - learned counsel for the 1 st respondent, also seeks
time to obtain instructions.
3. We have heard Sri.Benny Gervacis - learned Senior Counsel,
instructed by Sri.Balagangadaran, who submits that, on account of the
additional responsibility cast upon his client, she will have to invest
higher number of hours; thus causing a detriment on her autistic child.
He also says that his client is suffering from neurological issues, which
also would put her to prejudice, if she is made to take up the
additional responsibility.
4. We are also cognizant of the additional submissions of Sri.Benny
Gervacis - learned Senior Counsel, that the additional responsibility
could have been given to the petitioner only after her consent had
been obtained.
5. Sri.Mayankutty Mather - learned Senior Counsel sought a days' time
to respond to the afore, through appropriate pleadings."
4. Today Sri.Mayankutty Mather, learned Senior Counsel instructed
by Smt.Sreekala - learned Standing Counsel for respondents 2 and 3,
submitted that, contrary to the submissions of the petitioner, the stated
additional responsibility would not require her to put in any additional
hours and she has, in fact, not been even transferred from her own office
and has been offered the help of two Assistants. He submitted that all
other allegations are speculative in nature; and prayed that this Court not
enter into the same at this stage because the matter is pending
consideration by the learned CAT.
5. We have no doubt that, as matters now stand, the only proximate
cause for this Court being called upon by the petitioner to intervene in the
impugned interim order, is that she may be required to take up 'additional
responsibilities' in terms of time, which perhaps would cause prejudice to
her family - which is stated to be consisting of an autistic daughter and
had a father suffering from Alzheimer disease. However, if, as stated by
Sri.Mayankutty Mather - learned Senior Counsel, the petitioner has not
been transferred from her office and she is not required to put in any
additional time, then we see no reason to intervene at this stage, even as
an interim measure.
6. We are persuaded to the afore also because, the learned CAT is
seized of the matter and since all the issues will surely be considered on
its merits in due course. Moreover, though opposed by Sri.Benny Gervacis,
it is stated by the respondents that the petitioner has been offered two
Assistants.
7. As we have said above, we do not propose to enter into the merits
of any factual disputation at this stage.
In the afore circumstances, we close this Original Petition; however,
clarifying that we have not entered into the merits of any of the rival
contentions and leaving them all open to be impelled by the respective
parties before the learned CAT, when the Original Application is finally
disposed of.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
Sd/-
EASWARAN S.
JUDGE
MC/3.5
APPENDIX OF OP (CAT) 76/2024
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure A 11 A TRUE COPY OF NOTIFICATION DATED
16..4..2024 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Annexure A 1 A TRUE COPY DISABILITY CERTIFICATE NO. P
3.885/G/GM[H] ISSUED TO MS. MALAVIKA BY THE
MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, TRIVANDRUM DATED
9..4..2019
Annexure A 2 A TRUE COPY OF NEUROPSYCHOLOGICAL
ASSESSMENT REPORT ISSUED TO SHRI
JANARDHANAN ISSUED BY CONSULTANT
NEUROLOGIST DATED 5..3..2020
Annexure A 3 A TRUE COPY OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATE ISSUED
TO THE APPLICANT BY KIMS HEALTH DATED
13.2.2024
Annexure A 4 A TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OFFICIAL
LANGUAGE MANUAL
Annexure A 5 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 6..2..2024
ISSUED BY OFFICE OF A G [ A & E ] ,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Annexure A 6 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE APPLICANT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
13.2.2024
Annexure A 7 A TRUE COPY OF THE SUBMISSION MADE BY THE
APPLICANT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
23..2..2024
Annexure A 8 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 3..4..2024
ISSUED BY DEPUTY DIRECTOR
[ IMPLEMENTATION ] DEPT. OF OFFICIAL
LANGUAGE, NEW DELHI TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT [
IN HINDI ]
Annexure A 8 [ a ] TRUE TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE A 8
Annexure A 9 A TRUE COPY OF LETTER DATED 3..4..2024
ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR
[ IMPLEMENTATION ] REGIONAL IMPLEMENTATION
OFFICE, SOUTH WEST, KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KOCHI
TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT
Annexure A 9 [ a ] TRUE TRANSLATION OF ANNEXURE A 9
Annexure A 10 A TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY
THE APPLICANT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
11.4.2024
Annexure 10 [ a ] A TRUE COPY OF COVERING LETTER SUBMITTED BY
THE APPLICANT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED
11.4..2024
Exhibit P 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION
261/2024 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES
Exhibit P 2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.4.2024 IN
O.A. NO. 261 OF 2024 ISSUED BY THE CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Exhibit P 3 A TRUE COPY OF THE FULL TEXT OF THE
ANNEXURE A 4
Exhibit P 4 A TRUE COPY OF THE OFFICIAL LANGUAGE RULES
Exhibit P 5 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF MANUAL
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
Exhibit P 6 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED FROM THE
OFFICE OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED
24.4.2024
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R3(a) True copy of the relevant extract of the
O.M.No.13035/3/80-OL( C) dated 27.04.1981
Exhibit R3(b) True copy of the Resolution No.
20012/1/2017 - OL(Policy) Government of
India, Ministry of Home Affairs dated
31.3.2017
