The Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, has dropped contempt proceedings against the Chairman of the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC).
In 2006, the Madras High Court directed the UPSC and the Union Territory of Puducherry to regularise the services of some lecturers in various Government Arts and Science Colleges as a one-time measure.
The UPSC convened a selection committee meeting to assess the suitability of lecturers and recommended that they be regularised. Subsequently, the UT Government regularised their services from 2009.
Aggrieved at the order of the government, A.G. Abel Sagayam and a few others filed an application before the CAT seeking to regularise their services with retrospective effect.
The CAT Bench directed the authorities to regularise the services of the applicants with effect from the date of initial appointment.
The applicants filed a contempt petition praying to punish the respondents, including the Chairman of the UPSC. The CAT Bench also issued a notice to him in the contempt petition. Filing a reply affidavit though P. Chandrasekaran, counsel for the UPSC, its Chairman D.P. Agrawal stated that action to implement the order was required to be taken by the government of the Union Territory as the same was administrative in nature and did not fall under the purview of the Commission. When the matter came up before the Tribunal, counsel for the UPSC submitted that the applicant had wrongly impleaded the UPSC Chairman as a respondent instead of the Secretary. The Tribunal said that the notice issued to the UPSC Chairman would be discharged and directed the registry to issue a fresh notice to the Secretary if he were impleaded by the applicants.
Keywords: UPSC
