National Commission For Scheduled Castes Not Equivalent To Civil Court, Can't Issue Directions After Deciding Inter Se Rights Of Parties: Delhi HC
The Delhi High Court has observed that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes cannot issue directions after deciding the inter se rights of the parties, like a civil court. Justice Rekha Palli observed:"Merely because the Commission, for the purpose of carrying out investigations or enquiring into any complaint, has the powers of a Civil Court trying a suit and, therefore, is entitled...
The Delhi High Court has observed that the National Commission for Scheduled Castes cannot issue directions after deciding the inter se rights of the parties, like a civil court.
Justice Rekha Palli observed:
"Merely because the Commission, for the purpose of carrying out investigations or enquiring into any complaint, has the powers of a Civil Court trying a suit and, therefore, is entitled to issue directions inter alia for enforcing the attendance of any person from any part of the country, receiving evidence on affidavits, cannot imply that the Commission is equivalent to a Civil Court or that it can like a Civil Court issue directions after deciding the inter se rights of the parties."
The Court was dealing with a petition filed by National Small Industries Corporation Ltd. challenging the order dated August 23, 2021 passed by the National Commission for Scheduled Castes whereby the Commission had not only directed the petitioner to hold a review DPC, but also further directed that respondents no.2 and 3 be promoted to the post of General Manager (Senior Grade) with retrospective date and all consequential benefits.
It was the petitioner's case that the Commission had, while passing the impugned order, overstepped its jurisdiction and issued directions to grant retrospective promotion to respondents no.2 and 3 with all consequential benefits.
It was submitted that the Commission had no authority to issue such directions. Reliance was placed on Article 338(5) and (8) of the Constitution of India.
The Court relied upon a judgment of the Apex Court in All India Indian Overseas Bank SC And ST Employees' Welfare Association and Others v. Union of India and Others, wherein it was held that the powers of a civil court of granting injunctions, temporary or permanent, cannot be exercised by the Commission nor can such a power be inferred or derived from Article 338(8) of the Constitution.
"In the light of the aforesaid it is evident that the Commission can only make recommendations and not issue any directions of the nature as issued vide the impugned order," the Court concluded.
It added "In the present case, the directions issued by the Commission for granting retrospective promotion to respondent no.2 and 3 were clearly beyond the powers of the Commission. I, therefore, have no hesitation in holding that the respondent no.1 Commission, had while issuing a direction that the respondent nos.2 and 3 be granted promotion from a retrospective date and be paid all consequential benefits, overstepped its jurisdiction."
However, noting that the Commission has the jurisdiction to make recommendations, the Court partly allowed the writ petition by clarifying that the impugned order will be treated only as a recommendation and not as any direction.
"In case the respondent no.2 and 3 have any surviving grievance, it will be open for them to approach a competent court/tribunal for redressal thereof," it added.
Case Title: NATIONAL SMALL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION LTD. v. NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTES & ORS.
Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 730