The Delhi High Court recently expressed strong disapproval with the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) for questioning the mental abilities of a litigant and rejecting the plea without considering the merits of the case.

A Division Bench of Justices C Hari Shankar and Om Prakash Shukla said that the courts and high judicial tribunals like CAT are expected to exercise balance and restraint. 

“The Tribunal had no authority, whatsoever, to doubt the mental stability of the petitioner. The Tribunal ought to have borne in mind the fact that a judicial order leaves its imprint on the lives of the persons involved much after the ink on the order has dried, and that expressing doubts regarding the mental stability of the litigant before it may have lasting socio-personal effects,” the Bench said. 

The CAT had rejected three applications filed by petitioner DC Mishra, a senior scientist at the Indian Council of Agricultural Research (ICAR). In its order, the CAT not only rejected Mishra’s claims but also made adverse observations about his conduct and suggested that he be examined for possible mental disability.

Further, the tribunal also rejected Mishra’s request to engage a counsel. 

After considering the case, the High Court observed that the CAT order makes for a very “unhappy reading”. 

“The mere fact that the OAs may have been pending for some time does not empower the Tribunal to act in pique and pass an order without any comprehensive consideration of the merits of the case. We find that even a request by the petitioner to engage a counsel was brushed aside,” the Court observed. 

It added that the part of the order where the CAT asked the Director General of ICAR to get Mishra medically examined for mental disabilities is “most unfortunate”. 

Therefore, it set aside the order and sent the matter back to the tribunal to be decided in three months. 

Petitioner DC Mishra argued his case in person. 

Advocates Gagan Gupta, Shitanshu and Mishika Gupta represented the Union of India. 

[Read Judgement]