SC refers IFS Sanjiv Chaturvedi's case to a larger bench

New Delhi [India], March 4 (ANI): In a very significant judgment, a Division Bench of Supreme Court consisting of Justice MR Shah and Justice BV Nagarathna has referred the case of Uttarakhand IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi, to a larger bench in a judgment pronounced on March 3 on the issue of 'territorial jurisdiction of the concerned High court to decide a challenge to an order passed by the Chairman, CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi'.
The bench noted that "the issue involved, affects a large number of employees and is of public importance".
Supreme Court bench noted that judgment passed by another Division Bench of Court, last year, in case of former Chief Secretary of West Bengal, Alapan Bandopadhyay, had said that, "any decision of the Tribunal can only be subjected to a scrutiny before Division Bench of High Court within whose jurisdiction the Tribunal concerned falls" and had set aside the judgment passed by the Calcutta High Court.
Another landmark order passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Sanjiv Chaturvedi, yesterday, is that it is one of the longest reserved judgments in the records of Supreme Court as the judgment was reserved on April 26 last year and was finally pronounced after more than ten months on March 3 this year.
The dispute began when Uttarakhand cadre IFS officer Sanjiv Chaturvedi filed a petition before the Nainital Bench of CAT in February 2020, challenging lateral entry of Joint Secretaries in Central Government, the newly introduced system of 360-degree appraisal and prevalent guidelines for empanelment at the level of Joint Secretary and above in Central Government.
In December 2020 on the application of the Central Government, the then Chairman of CAT transferred the hearing of the case to Delhi Bench of CAT on the ground that "the decision on the policy would impact the very functioning of the Central Government". This order was challenged by Sanjiv Chaturvedi before Nainital High Court which set aside this order in October 2021 terming it as "legally unsustainable".
Orders of the Uttarakhand High Court were challenged by Central Government, in February 2022, before Supreme Court and in their plea before Apex Court, Central Government represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta cited judgment passed in similar case of Alapan Bandopadhyay. However, the division bench of the Supreme Court has ordered that matter, ".... should be considered by a larger bench. Let the registry place the matter before the Chief Justice of India for appropriate orders at the earliest so that the aforesaid issue is resolved at the earliest." (ANI)