- 1 - 2093 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 2093 OF 2001 Airports Authority of India & ors .. Petitioners vs Uminder Kumar Yadav .. Respondent Mr.Girish Kulkarni with Mr.S.K.Sheri i.b M.V.Kini & Co for Petitioner Mr.Sandip Marne for Respondent CORAM: D.K.DESHMUKH & N.D.DESHPANDE, JJ DATE: 18th November,2010 P.C. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the parties. 1. By this petition, the petitioners challenge the order dated 20.4.2001 passed - 2 - 2093 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai in Original Application No.588 of 1998 directing the Union of India -The Director General of Civil Aviation and the National Airport Authority to regularise the petitioner as an Assistant Technical Officer with effect from 17.7.1982/31.7.1982 and also directing them for granting further promotion from the date his juniors were promoted. It is an admitted position that the petitioner was initially in the service of the Government of India-Director General of Civil Aviation and he was appointed as an Assistant Technical officer with effect from 17th August, 1982 on ad hoc basis. It is also common ground before us that the petitioner was sent on deputation to the National Airport Authority with effect on 1st June, 1986. Subsequently, he was absorbed in service of the National Airport Authority with effect from 2nd October, - 3 - 2093 1989. In this background, in the reply filed on behalf of the respondents an objection was raised to the maintainability of the Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal because, a petition under the Administrative Tribunal Act against the National Airport Authority is not maintainable. A perusal of the order impugned in the petition also shows that this contention has been referred to by the tribunal in paragraph 8 of its order. It is also clear from the order that this contention though is referred to, has not been decided by the tribunal. Learned counsel appearing for the respondent who is the Original Petitioner referred to an order dated 2nd August, 1989 passed in Original Application No.952 of 1987 by the Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi in the case of SHRI CHAMAN SINGH. Perusal of that orde r shows that in that case, a finding - 4 - 2093 has been recorded in paragraph 5 that the petitioner in that petition continues to be an employee of the Central Government on deputation to the National Airport Authority. Therefore, anything said in that judgment in reference to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal will not be relevant to this case. Then our attention was invited to the order dated 21st March,1994 again passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench in Original Application No.730 of 1987 in the case of CHANDRAKANT UDESHI. A perusal of that order shows that directions in that order are not binding on the National Airport Authority. In our opinion, as questions of jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal to entertain the petition was raised and as the point of jurisdiction was not already decided in other proceedings, it was necessary for the tribunal to decide that question. In our - 5 - 2093 opinion, therefore, following order would meet the interest of justice: (i)The order impugned is set aside. Original Application No.588 of 1998 is remanded back to the Central Administrative Tribunal,Mumbai for a fresh decision. The Tribunal shall before deciding the petition merits decide the following preliminary issues: (a) Is the petition in so far as it seeks directions against respondent nos.3 and 4 in that petition is maintainable before the C.A.T. ? (b) If yes, can any effective relief be granted to the petitioner in that petition without issuing directions to the respondent nos. 2 and 4 ? - 6 - 2093 Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. D.K.Deshmukh, J N.D.Deshpande, J - 7 - 2093