Allahabad HC: Appeal Against CAT Order In Contempt Proceedings Lies Before Supreme Court Only; No Scope Of High Court Jurisdiction 

K Chakra Pani

The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that an Order on a contempt matter before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) under Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 can only be appealed before the Supreme Court and not the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

A Division Bench of Hon’ble Justices Donadi Ramesh and Vivek Kumar Birla were deciding over an appeal filed against the order of the CAT regarding contempt of its orders.

The Tribunal directed the competent authority to issue orders for the appointment of the applicants as regular Assistant Medical Officers, which was not followed by the Respondents. This led to the contempt petition before the CAT, which decided that there was no contempt by the Respondents and that there was sufficient compliance with the earlier orders of the Tribunal.

The issue before the Court was the maintainability of the petition before the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, when Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 empowered the Tribunal to the position of a High Court in matters of contempt, and that any appeal shall lie from the High Court under Section 19 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971.

In a clear case of inter-reading of different statutes and the Constitution of India, the Bench relied on T Sudhakar Prasad v. Government of A.P. (2001) 1 SCC 516 to base its decision, holding that the Tribunal is conferred with the jurisdiction of not only the subordinate courts but also the High Court under Section 17 of the 1985 Actwhile exercising its powers under Section 19 of the 1971 Act. While Section 17 read with Section 19 provides for an appeal only to the Supreme Court and not the High Court, an order under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 has no remedy and no scope for appeal.

An inter-reading of the two provisions led to the Court holding that the ‘High Court’ under Section 19 will include a ‘Tribunal’ for the purposes of Section 17 of the 1985 Act. 

Accordingly, the Court dismissed the petitions as not being maintainable and ordered that the appeal lie only before the Supreme Court and not the High Court against a contempt order passed by the Tribunal.

Name of the case: Dr Brajendra Singh Chauhan And 2 Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal And 2 Others [WRIT – A No. – 602 of 2024]

Bench: Justice Donadi Ramesh and Justice Vivek Kumar Birla.

Click here to access the judgment.