हिंदी खबर
Representative image.
Representative image.

Delhi HC issues notice to National Commission for Scheduled Tribes on IRFCL plea challenging summons

ANI | Updated: Feb 28, 2022 17:18 IST

New Delhi [India], February 28 (ANI): The Delhi High court has issued a notice to the National Commission for Scheduled Tribes (NCST) on the plea moved by the Indian Railway Finance Corporation (IRFCL). The IRFCL has challenged the two summons issued by NCST on a complaint pertaining to service condition by an employee of the IRFCL. The commission had summoned the Chairman cum Managing Director (CMD) of IRFCL.
Justice V Kameswar Rao on Monday issued the notice to the commission which was accepted by the counsel appearing for the commission. The bench also issued notice to Rajkumar Naik on whose complaint the summons of January 28 and February 22 were issued.
Advocate Pardeep Dahiya, counsel appearing for IRFCL submitted that the commission has issued summons and has decided to investigate a complaint pertaining to service conditions of an employee of the petitioner corporation. He added that there were no orders for the issuance of summons.
The bench asked the counsel for the petitioner about the order issuing the summons. The bench listed the matter for further hearing on May 7.

The Counsel argued that the summons issued is ex-facie illegal, arbitrary, and capricious. The summons are also without jurisdiction and in utter violation of the law laid down by this Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court of India.
He further argued that this Court in the case titled National Seed Corporation Ltd. Vs. National Commission for SC & ST, held that the commission has the power to enquire into a specific complaint and make its reports thereon but its reports are recommendatory in nature and as such the power vested with the commission of inquiry and submission of the report cannot be extended to adjudication of disputes between an individual and a corporation or statutory authority.
Advocate Dahiya submitted that the High Court had further held that the Commission is not a Tribunal or a forum discharging the functions of a judicial character or a Court. "Article 338 does not entrust the said Commission with the powers to take up the role of a Court or an adjudicatory tribunal and to determine the rights inter-se the parties."
The petition stated that the complainant had made a representation to Union Minister G Kishan Reddy seeking necessary action in relation to the promotion to appropriate his post in the Executive Category.
The Complainant made another representation to Reddy reiterating his grievances and alleging harassment at the hand of the Corporation. He finally approached the commission with a complaint. (ANI)