The failure to file a delay condonation application renders an original application before the Tribunal non-maintainable, emphasizing strict adherence to statutory provisions.

JUDGMENT :

Sujit Narayan Prasad, J.

Prayer:

1. The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing of the order dated 15.01.2024, whereby and whereunder, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ranchi has dismissed the O.A. No. 051/00842/2023 filed by the petitioner on the ground of limitation.

Factual Matrix:

2. The brief facts of the case as per the pleading made in the writ petition which requires to be enumerated herein, reads as under:

The petitioner was appointed as Assistant Station Master on 01.08.1998 at Bhav Nagar Division (BVP), Western Railway and was transferred to Silli, South Eastern Railway as an Asst. Station Master in the year 2003.

Respondent No.4, on 19.07.2007, had issued notification inviting option for the post of Traffic Apprentice in the scale of 5500-9000/- against 10% quota through LDCE from all Group ‘C’ Staff of Operating Department (other than Ministerial Staff). Applicant had applied for the post, participated in the LDCE and cleared the examination. Result was published on 09.02.2009 and the Chief D.T.I., Ranchi was directed by respondent No.4 to release applicant for joining as Traffic Apprentice w.e.f. 11.04.2010. Applicant was released to join for the training in the month of April 2010. Meanwhile, applicant got promotion to the post of Station Master.

It is the case of the petitioner that subsequently the posts of Traffic Apprentice and Station Master got merged and applicant, after completion of training, was waiting for appropriate gradation to the next pay fixation but he was not provided the seniority or raise in pay. Respondents issued a seniority list on 04.05.2016 in which his name appeared at serial 56 while other employees who had not qualified in the LDCE were placed above him. Applicant submitted a representation in 2017 relating the issue of his pay and seniority. He submitted another representation in 2021 but respondents have not redressed his grievance.

Being aggrieved, the petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A./051/00842/2023 which has been dismissed on the ground of limitation.

3. It is evident from the factual aspect of the instant case that the writ petitioner being aggrieved with his position in the seniority list and consequent upon the same, denying his promotional benefit, has approached to the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing application under Section 14 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.

The Tribunal has heard the learned counsel for the applicant, the writ petitioner herein, as also the respondent.

A serious objection has been raised on behalf of the respondent that the cause of action said to be accrued in favour of the writ petitioner on 04.05.2016, the day when the seniority list was published and the learned Tribunal has been approached in the year 2023 by filing original application but without filing any delay condonation application as required under Section 21(3) of the Act, 1985, as such, the original application is not fit to be entertained.

The Tribunal has considered the submission advanced on behalf of the respondent and agreeing to the objection so raised on behalf of the respondent and by giving finding of having no prayer for condonation of delay has held the original application as not maintainable in view of the provision of Section 21 of the Act, 1985 against which the present writ petition has been filed.

Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner:

4. Mr. Sachin Kumar, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that admittedly the delay condonation application was not filed but merely on account of the fact that the delay condonation application had not been filed, the rejection of the original application cannot be said to be proper reason being that the petitioner is having genuine grievance of his supersession as also the denial of pay scale attached to the post to which the petitioner is claiming his promotion based upon the seniority list publish