P.L. KANTHA RAO AND ORS. versus STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH

Citation: [1995] 1 S.C.R. 240 · Decided: 13-01-1995 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K. RAMASWAMY, S.C. SEN · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

.. 
A 
P.L. KANTHA RAO AND ORS. 
v. 
STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH 
JANUARY 13, 1995 
B 
[K RAl\fASWAMY AND S.C. SEN, JJ.) 
_L ____ --~ 
I 
A.P. Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985-Secs. 29 & 29A-Swpe 
of-Execution. of ordei-Enforcement--:'Proceeding"-Meaning of. 
~ ', 
C 
Petitioners had filed a petition befo..;; the Administrative Tribunal 
· which allowed the same. For its implementation, the petitioners filed a writ 
petitio~ in the High Court which directed them: to" approach the Ad· 
ministrative Tribunal to get an enforcement order under Para 8(5) of the 
Presidential Order. After obtaining a certificate to this effect, the 
petitioners moved the Chief Judge; City Civil Court, Hyderabad "hich 
directed its implementation. The order in the execution came to be chat-
• 
E 
F 
Ienged by the respondents in the High Court. .. 
TI1e High Court held that under Sec. 29 of the Act, the execution is 
by way of a proceeding thereby attracting Sections 29 and 29·A of the Act. 
It further held that as the present Tribunal had been constituted under 
-
" 
-
I 
-
-
. 
- -
the Act, the petitioners were entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the 
Tribunal f~renforcement of the order passed by the erstwhile Administra-
tive Tribunal. . 
Dismissi,;g the petition, this Court 
HELD : Enforcement of the order is a "proceeding" within the 
. meaning of the A.P. Administrative Tribunals Act and also as broadly 
understood. Jurisdiction to adjudicate under the provisions of the Act had 
been expressly taken out from the Civil Courts and the High Court a·nd 
conferred upon the Tribunal constitl.<ted under the Act. Thus, the execution 
G petition filed hi the civil court would not lie and the petitioners could avail 
the 'femedy of enforcement before the Tribunal constituted under the Act 
and Roles. (242-E-F] · 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Special Leave Petition No. 
H 23415 of 1994. 
240 
P.L. KANTHA RAO v. STATE OF {\.P. 
241 
Fron the .Judgment and Order dated 15.6.94 of the Andhra Pradesh A 
High Court in C.R.P. No. 3708 of 1993. 
H.S. Gururaja Rao, Seshagiri Rao and S. Muralidhar for the 
Petitioners. 
The following Order of the Court was delivered : 
B 
This petition is filed against the order of a Single Judge of the High 
Court of Andhra Pradesh, dated 15.6.94, made in C.R.P. No. 3708/93. The 
petitioners filed R.P. No. 986/84 in the A.P. Administrative Tribunal con-
stituted under the Presidential Order 1985, pursuant to the power under C 
Article 371-D. The Tribunal by its order dated March 19, 1986, allowed 
their petition. For its implementation the petitioners filed a writ petition in 
the High Court in which by order dated 6.3.87 the High Court directed to 
approach the Administrative Tribunal to seek an order under para 8(5) of 
the Preside.1tial Order for its enforcement. On obtaining the certificate 
from the Tribunal on March 9, 1987, the petitioners filed E.P. No. 4/89 in D 
the court of Chief Judge, City Civil Court, Hyderabad. When the Chief 
Judge directed its implementation, the order in the execution came to be 
challenged in the High Court. The learned Single Jadge in the impugned 
order held that under s.29 of the Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 (for 
short, 'the Act'), the execution is by way of a proceeding and that "therefore, E 
Sections 29 and 29-A of the Act get attracted. It was also held that as the 
present A.P. Administrative Tribunal came to be constituted under the 
Act, the petitioners are entitled to invoke the jurisdiction of the Tribunal 
for enforcement of the order passed by the erstwhile administrative 
tribunal. Feeling aggrieved, this petition has beed filed. 
After perusing the relevant provisions and the order of the High 
Court, we are of the view that the High Court is right in its conclusion that 
F 
it is a proceeding under ss.29 and 29-A of the Act and that the petitioners 
could avail of the remedy of enforcement before the Administrative 
Tribunal constituted under the Act. The relevant portion of s.29 reads thus: G 
"...... .... other proceeding pending bdore any court or other 
authority immediately before the date of e!>tablishment of a 
Tribunal under this Act, being a .... : .... by proceeding the cause; of 
action whereon it is based is such that it would have been, if it had 
arisen after such establishment, within the jurisdiction of such H 
242 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1995] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
Tribunal, shall stand transferred on that date to such Tribunal". 
The word 'proceeding' 

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.