AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Badar Durrez Ahmed, J.—The petitioner by filing this PIL has made a grievance that the respondent no.6 ought not to have been appointed as the Presiding Officer of the Appellate Tribunal under the provisions contained in Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957 and New Delhi Municipal Council Act, 1994. It is contended by the petitioner that in view of the Division Bench judgment of this Court in CW2590/1990 decided on 26.02.1993, it was not competent for the appointing authority to appoint respondent no.6 as the Presiding Officer of the said Appellate Tribunal. Reading the judgment, it is clear that the Court expressed an opinion that a judicial officer should not be sent on deputation for holding an administrative post outside the superintendence and control of the High Cour
When an officer is required to discharge his functions as judicial officer or a qwasi-judicial officer, question does not arise. The post to which the respondent no.6 has been appointed is not an administrative post. Had it been a purely administrative post, the matter would have been different. But, that is not so. The appointment in question is not in conflict with the decision of this Court in CW 2590/1990.
Therefore, we find no reason to entertain this petition and accordingly the same is dismissed.