Dismissed

Hussain Mohd. Son of Shri Bashir Khan v. Central Administrative Tribunal

Rajasthan HC21 Nov 2019CMCW/455/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Two-judge Bench reviewed an application seeking condonation of a 540-day delay in filing a review petition. The Court found the delay unexplained and not bona fide regarding a previous order on retiral dues versus pension entitlement, ultimately dismissing both the application and the underlying review petition.

What did the court decide?

Application for condonation of delay dismissed; review petition dismissed as time-barred.

Hussain Mohd. Son of Shri Bashir Khan Vs… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Rajasthan HC (2019)

¶1

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

¶2

BENCH AT JAIPUR

¶3

D. B. Civil Misc. Application No.455/2019

¶4

¶5

D.B. Review Petition (Writ) No. 111/2019

¶6

¶7

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.6804/2008

¶8

Hussain Mohd. Son Of Shri Bashir Khan, Aged About 45 Years, Resident Of Rangpur Road, Behind Lal Kothi, Kota Junction Kota (Raj.), Lastly Posted As Gangman At Gang No. 6, Under The Office Of Pw-1, Baran Division, Kota (Raj.)

¶9

----Applicant- Petitioner

¶10

Versus

¶11

Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (Raj.)

¶12

….Respondent

¶13

Union Of India, Through General Manager West Central Railway, Jabalpur (M.p.)

¶14

Divisional Railway Manager, West Central Railway, Kota Division, Kota.

¶15

Sr. Divisional Engineer (Hq), West Central Railway, Kota Division, Kota.

¶16

Divisional Engineer (Track), West Central Railway, Kota Division, Kota.

¶17

Assistant Engineer (North), West Central Railway, Kota Division, Kota.

¶18

----Reviewed-Respondents-Petitioners

¶19

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Shalesh Prakash Sharma, Advocate Ms. Archana Mantri, Advocate For Respondent(s) : Mr. Rinesh Kumar Gupta, Advocate

¶20

HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA

¶21

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA

Order

(2 of 2)

21/11/2019

Vide this order, application moved by the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the review petition would be disposed of.

¶26

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.

¶27

Writ petition filed by petitioner-Hussain Mohd. was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 03.10.2017. However, the review petition has been filed after a delay of 540 days by the review petitioner. The explanation given in the application is that the directions given by this Court in order dated 03.10.2017 were only to the extent of payment of retiral dues and the petitioner was not entitled for any pension and therefore, it was necessary to seek clarification of the order dated 03.10.2017. Order dated 03.10.2017 was passed in the presence of the counsel for the Railways. In-case, the applicant felt that there was any ambiguity in the order dated 03.10.2017, it could have immediately approached this Court for clarification. However, the application has been filed after a long delay and the said delay remains unexplained. In the facts and circumstances of the present case, delay in filing the review petition cannot be said to bona-fide. Hence, we are of the considered opinion that the delay in filing the review petition cannot be condoned.

¶28

Accordingly, the application is dismissed. Consequently, the review petition is dismissed, being time barred.

¶29

(NARENDRA SINGH DHADDHA),J

¶30

Gourav /Jatin/10

Hussain Mohd. Son of Shri Bashir Khan v. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hussain Mohd. Son of Shri Bashir Khan v. Central Administrative Tribunal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Karan Singh Panwar S/O Shri Shiv Singh Panwar Vs Pawan Kumar Goyal

Mayur Raj Singh S/O Shri Gajraj Singh Vs Pawan Kuamr Goyal

Vinay Kumar Pinjani Vs Comme Secondary Edu and Ors.

Shankar Lal Vs U O I and Ors.

Jaipur Zila Sahakari Bhoomi Vs Radhey Shyam Sharma and Anr.

State of Raj Vs Anita Gaur