JUDGMENT

Rajan Roy, J.

1. Heard Sri S.K. Kalia, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Sameer Kalia, learned Advocate for opposite party No. 1, Sri Pankaj Nath, learned Additional Chief Standing Counsel for the petitioner. The question involved in this writ petition is whether the claim petition filed by opposite party No. 1 was barred by limitation prescribed under Section 5(b) of the U.P. Public Services Tribunal Act, 1976 (hereinafter referred as 'the Act')? and whether the learned Tribunal has considered this issue in the right perspective?

2. If the answer to the aforesaid is in the negative, then it would not be necessary to consider the merits of the case, as decided by the Tribunal, if the answer is in the affirmative, it would be so required.

3. The Tribunal has been constituted under 'the Act' to adjudicate the disputes in respect of matters relating to employment of public servants as defined thereunder. Reference or claim petitions, as they are ordinarily referred, are filed before the Tribunal under Section 4 of the Act, which reads as under:

"Section 4. Reference of claim to Tribunal.--(1) Subject to the other provisions of this Act, a person who is or has been a public