ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
Surendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Thru. Secy. Ministry of Finance, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Om Prakash Shukla, J.
A. INTRODUCTION
1. This writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been filed by the petitioner, with the following reliefs :
ii. Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow to decide the review application No. 20/2016 in Original Application No. 561/2005, Surendra Kumar Vs. Union of India and others on merits.”
B. FACTUAL MATRIX
2. In the year 2001, the petitioner was engaged as daily wage casual labour under the Joint Commissioner, Income Tax, Faizabad and continued to work as such till his services was terminated orally w.e.f. 02.09.2005.
3. The aforesaid oral order of termination w.e.f. 02.09.2005 was challenged by the petitioner by preferring Original Application No. 561 of 2005 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Tribunal”). The Tribuna
Ajit Kumar Rath vs. State of Orissa
Gopalbandhu Biswal Vs. Krishna Chandra Mohanty
Commissioner of Sales Tax, Uttar Pradesh Vs. Madan Lal Dan & Sons. Bareilly
N. Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy
B. Madhuri Goud v. B. Damodar Reddy
Mangu Ram V/s Municipal Corporation Delhi
Mukri Gopalan V/s C.P. Aboobacker
The right to review is strictly limited to the timeframe established by applicable rules, and delays cannot be condoned without statutory authority.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.