Back
RAJAN ROY, OM PRAKASH SHUKLA
State of U. P. – Appellant
Versus
Birendra Bahadur Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rajan Roy, J.
Both these writ petitions involve similar facts and common issues, therefore, they have been heard together and are being decided by a common judgment.
2. Heard Shri Rakesh Kumar alongwith Shri Shiv Kumar Soni and Shri Ravi Shanker Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Anand Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-State in Writ - A No. 16773 of 2019. In connected Writ-A No. 15076 of 2021, none has appeared on behalf of the respondent while learned Standing Counsel has argued on behalf of the State.
3. As regards Writ - A No. 16773 of 2019 we find that the petitioner, who was claimant in Claim Petition No. 232 of 2014 before the Tribunal, was visited with a punishment order of 27.10.2007. He filed an Appeal which was decided on 25.10.2008. He thereafter filed a Revision on 22.12.2008. He ultimately gave a legal notice on 2.1.2014 as is referable under the proviso to Section 4(6) of the Act, 1976 and on failure to pass any order in the revision, the said Claim Petition was filed in the year 2014, which has been dismissed, albeit on merits on 29.1.2019. The petitioner-Ram Babu's counsel contended that there is no limitation prescribe
The court established that limitation for filing claims under the U.P. Public Services (Tribunal) Act, 1976 does not apply when no final order has been issued in the related appeal or representation.
It is well settled that in order to raise the plea that the claim petition is within the period of limitation and not barred by it, it must be shown that the remedy been followed or availed of was a ....
Point of Law - Delay or laches is one of the factors which is to be borne in mind by the High Court when they exercise their discretionary powers under Article 226 of the Constitution.
The tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction by failing to address the limitation issue regarding the challenge to the punishment order, as over eight years had elapsed since its issuance, affirming that p....
The Writ Petition was dismissed as not maintainable due to being filed after the limitation period. On merits, the court found that the promotion of Sri G.K. Venkoba was granted under the reservation....
The Appellate Tribunal acted without jurisdiction by entertaining an appeal barred by limitation, and mens rea is not required for civil liabilities.
Jurisdictional limitations must be strictly observed, as appellate tribunals cannot entertain appeals filed beyond statutory time limits, reinforcing the necessity for procedural compliance in civil ....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
