Dismissed

Biswanath Malla v. Union of India and Ors.

Orissa HC8 Dec 2017WP(C)/12885/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal order that rejected a promotion claim due to limitation. Relying on established Supreme Court law, the Court declined intervention as the Tribunal correctly held that a belated representation could not revive a long-settled claim.

What did the court decide?

The writ petition stands dismissed; no consideration given.

2. Petitioner, in this writ petition, assails the order dated 06.04.2009 passed by the le arned Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack in O.A. No.48 of 2006 in dismiss ing the application on the ground of limitation and observing that the petitioner has got his promotion as per his turn taking into consideration his service records which the petitioner did not challenge at any point of time prior to the instant Original Application.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and on perusal of record, more particu larly the order impugned herein, it appears that the learned Tribunal has negated the claim of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioners grievance is hit by either of the provisio ns embodied in the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985; because the petitioner has sought his pr omotion to the post of UDC with effect from 1976, which is prior to three years of the setting up of the Tribunal and he did not approach the appropriate court of law soon after the cause of action arose. Relying on a decision of the Honble Supreme Court in the case of C.Jacob Vs. Director of Geology and Mining and another, reported in AIR 2009 SC 264, learned Tribunal held that disposal of representation of the petitioner cannot give a new life to his belated claim which was set at rest since long. Disposal of representation in compliance of direction would not revive the stale claim of an employee.

In view of the above settled position of law, this Court declines to exercise writ juris diction to interfere with the decision of the learned Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition merits no consideration and stands dismissed.

Biswanath Malla v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biswanath Malla v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of Inda and Ors. Vs Muralidhar Behera

Indramani Behera Vs State

Radhanath MISHRAandORS Vs State and Ors.

Romesh Ashok Vs Union of India

State of Orissa Vs a.Apparao

Samarendra Kumar Puhan Vs State of Orissa