Satyendra Nath Mishra vs U.P. Public Service Tribunal, U.P. at Lucknow and others

M. Katju and Shitla Prasad Srivastava, JJ.—The petitioner is challenging the order of the U. P. Public Service Tribunal. Annexure-5 to the petition. Learned counsel for petitioner submitted that certain points were urged before the Tribunal but have not been dealt with by the Tribunal.

The presumption in law is that the Tribunal or the lower court has dealt with all the points which were urged before it, and if a certain point is not dealt with by the Tribunal or Court then the presumption is that that point was not urged before it vide Shanti Swamp v. 1st A.D.J. 1978 ARC 342. It often happens that in the memorandum of appeal or petition several points are taken but only some of the points are pressed, and hence the lower court or the Tribunal deals only with the points which are actually pressed. However, if the petitioner wishes to urge before the Tribunal that a point was not dealt with although pressed before the Court/Tribunal, then the petitioner should go to press before the same Court or Tribunal by means of a suitable application for this purpose. If the petitioner files such an application before the Tribunal, the same shall be decided expeditiously.

With this observation, this petition is disposed of.