his pay was reduced for three years with cumulative effect with loss of seniority vide order dated 21.12.1998, against which appeal preferred by the petitioner was dismissed on 23.04.1999. In the revision petition filed by the petitioner, the punishment order was quashed vide order dated 26.08.2002, with a direction for de-novo proceedings from the stage of inquiry. The De-novo proceedings Inquiry Officer submitted his report on 05.07.2005, whereby charges against the petitioner were not proved in the inquiry and vide order dated 03.02.2006, petitioner was exonerated from the charges. It is also contended that select list to the post of Senior Assistant Loco Pilot was issued on 05.06.2000, wherein, name of the petitioner was not reflecting. He made a representation with regard to the same on 30.06.2000. It is further contended that petitioner was promoted to the post of Senior Assistant Loco Pilot in the year 2003 and thereafter, to the post of Goods Loco Pilot in the year 2006. 3. It is contended that after exoneration on 03.02.2006, petitioner is entitled to be placed in the seniority from the date when his juniors were promoted. It is also contended that after exoneration, petitioner made a representation and request to the respondent to place him in seniority from the date when his juniors were promoted. The said request of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 23.09.2011, aggrieved by which petitioner filed the Original Application before CAT. It is also contended that CAT has rejected the application of the petitioner on the ground that it is not filed within limitation as provided under Section 21 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 (for short “CAT Act, 1985”).
