@JUDGMENTTAG-ORDER
Mohan M. Shantana Goudar, J.@mdashThe order dated 26th March 2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (''CAT'' for short), Bangalore Bench, Bangalore in Original Application No. 156/2011 is called in question in this writ petition. By the said order, the Tribunal has directed its Registry to proceed under Section 195 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner herein for lodging the complaint before the appropriate Magistrate. The Tribunal prima-facie found that the document at Annexure-A3 appears to be a fabricated document and consequently the petitioner herein has committed the offence punishable under Sections 420 and 468 of IPC.
2. The records reveal that the petitioner herein was working as a Postal Assistant. He has served the Postal Department for about 12 years. While in service, he applied for being appointed to the post of First Division Assistant/Second Division Assistant in the State Government. While so applying, the petitioner herein sought permission of the Postal Department to appear for examination conducted by the Karnataka Public Service Commission (''KPSC'' for short). By virtue of the document at Annexure-A2 dated 10.7.2006, the petitioner was granted No Objection Certificate by the Postal Department for appearing for KPSC examination. Accordingly, the petitioner appeared for KPSC examination and was appointed as Second Division Assistant. Thereafter he tendered his resignation to the post of Postal Assistant w.e.f. 4.12.2009. Such resignation letter was submitted by the petitioner through the Postal Department on 21.11.2009. Subsequently, the petitioner herein seems to have sought permission of the Postal Department to apply for the post of Grampanchayat Secretary-cum-Rural Development Assistant Grade-I, Grade-II on 27.11.2009 as is clear from Annexure-A4. Be that as it may, the resignation letter submitted by the petitioner was accepted by the Postal Department and he was relieved from duties in the afternoon of 4.12.2009 as per Annexure-A5. Now, he has joined the services of Panchayatraj Department as Secretary - Grade-I.
The petitioner approached the CAT, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore praying for grant of pro rata pensionary benefits for the services rendered by him in the Department of Posts treating the resignation as a technical formality. The said application is pending consideration before the Tribunal in O.A. No. 156/2011.
3. During the subsistence of O.A. No. 156/2011, statement of objections were filed by the Postal Department alongwith certain documents including Annexure-R1 dated 21.11.2009. Annexure-R1 discloses that the petitioner tendered resignation to the post of Postal Assistant unconditionally and on personal grounds w.e.f. 4.12.2009. However the petitioner relied upon the document at Annexure-A3 dated 21.11.2009 while filing O.A. No. 156/2011 before the Tribunal. Annexure-A3, on which the petitioner relies discloses that his resignation may be accepted since he has been appointed as SDA and he had appeared for the said examination after taking No Objection Certificate from the Postal Department. The petitioner herein in answer to the statement of objections filed by the Postal Department, filed Rejoinder on 21.2.2012 alongwith the document at Annexure-A13 dated 21.11.2009. Annexure-A13 is the same letter as the one filed by the Postal Department marked as Annexure-R1. By filing this Rejoinder, the petitioner has explained that though he had submitted his resignation letter as per Annexure-A3 through the Post Master under whom he was working, the said Post Master apart from accepting the resignation letter tendered by the petitioner as found in Annexure-A3, insisted that the petitioner should file another resignation letter indicating therein that he is tendering resignation unconditionally. Thus according to the petitioner, he submitted one more resignation letter as per Annexure-A13/Annexure-R1 on the very date i.e., 21.11.2009 to the satisfaction of the Post Master. It is further case of the petitioner that both the resignation letters vide Annexure-A3 and Annexure-A13 were received by the Post Master and it appears he has sent only Annexure-A13 to the higher officials.
When the facts stood thus, the Tribunal without calling for the original records for verifying the real facts, passed the impugned order directing prosecution against the petitioner herein by complying with the procedure as contemplated under Section 195 Cr.P.C..
4. The question as to whether the petitioner has fabricated the document or not should have been decided by the Tribunal after calling for the original Records. On the other hand, the Tribunal hurriedly proceeded to pass the impugned order directing the Registry to proceed under Section 195 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. Moreover, it is not open for the CAT to exercise jurisdiction as contemplated under Section 195 of Cr.P.C.. Section 195(3) of Cr.P.C. defines the term, "Court" as a Civil, Revenue or Criminal Court and includes a Tribunal constituted by or under a Central, Provincial or State Act if declared by that Act to be a Court for the purposes of Section 195 of Cr.P.C.. The CAT is not a Civil Court or a Criminal Court or a Revenue Court. It is a Tribunal constituted by or under the Central Act viz., Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. But the Administrative Tribunals Act does not declare the CAT to be a Court for the purpose of Section 195 of Cr.P.C..
In view of the above, the impugned order is liable to be quashed and the same stands quashed. Writ Petition is allowed accordingly.
