Tribunal Dismisses Petition Against LG Sinha and others, ₹ 1 Lakh Fine on petitioner

The CAT ruled that the LG cannot be sued directly under Article 361 of the Indian Constitution, which grants immunity to the Governor.

Advertisement
Advertisement
- Advertisement -

Onlykashmir.in News Desk

Srinagar, July 19: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) dismissed senior IAS officer Ashok Kumar Parmar’s petition against Jammu and Kashmir’s incumbent Lieutenant Governor Manoj Sinha and other senior IAS officers, imposing a Rs 1 lakh fine on Parmar for filing a petition deemed to harass the respondents.

Parmar had filed the petition seeking relief regarding his annual confidential report and empanelment. He named LG Manoj Sinha, Cabinet Secretary Rajiv Gauba, Union Home Secretary Ajay Kumar Bhalla, Secretary of the Department of Personnel & Training S. Radha Chauhan, J&K Chief Secretary, Advisor to LG Rajeev Rai Bhatnagar, Financial Commissioner Shaleen Kabra, and ex-Chief Secretary of J&K Dr. Arun Kumar Mehta as respondents.

The CAT ruled that the LG cannot be sued directly under Article 361 of the Indian Constitution, which grants immunity to the Governor. It criticized Parmar for naming the LG and senior officials without proper grounds and failing to follow required procedures such as providing prior notice. The tribunal also highlighted the failure of Parmar’s advocate, Ashutosh Khanna, to correctly advise him.

The Tribunal pointed out that Parmar had not produced proof of providing the required two-month notice before initiating civil proceedings against the LG. Additionally, it noted that Parmar sought reliefs related to his service conditions from the respondents in their private capacities, which was deemed inappropriate.

The Tribunal found that Parmar had not included necessary parties, such as the Union of India and the State of Jammu & Kashmir, in the petition, leading to its dismissal on the grounds of non-joinder of necessary parties.

In its conclusion, the CAT emphasized that the petition appeared to be an attempt to harass the respondents and lacked legal merit, resulting in the imposition of the fine on Parmar.

Our Social Networks

join our wHATSAPP CHANNEL

Advertisement

Latest

Advertisement

Related Articles

Advertisement
error: Content is protected !!