ORDER

PER: SURESH KUMAR MONGA, MEMBER (J) The original applicant has filed the Review Application making therein a prayer for recalling the order dated 04.03.2020 vide which the Original Application was dismissed by this Tribunal. Along with the Review Application, a Miscellaneous Application has also been filed for condonation of delay of 116 days in filing the said Review Application. On 06.11.2020, notice was given to the respondents only in the said Miscellaneous Application.

2. The respondents by way of filing a joint reply to Miscellaneous Application have joined the defence and have opposed the prayer made therein.

3. Shri J. Bhaskar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondents, raised a preliminary objection and submitted that the Miscellaneous Application for condonation of delay in a Review Application cannot be maintained in view of the provisions of Rule 17 (1) of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987 (hereinafter called as the ‘1987 Rules’). Learned counsel argued that no application for review of an order passed in the Original Application can be entertained unless it is filed within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the order sought to be reviewed.

To buttress his arguments, learned counsel further submitted that there is no provision in the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (hereinafter called as the ‘1985 Act’) read with the ‘1987 Rules’ which may empower this Tribunal to condone the delay in filing the Review Application if it is not filed within the prescribed period of limitation. In order to strengthen his argument, learned counsel placed reliance upon a judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh in G. Narasimha Rao vs Regional Joint Director of School Education, Warangal 2003 SCC Online AP 1068 wherein it has been held that this Tribunal has no power and authority to condone the delay in filing the Review Application. Learned counsel further relied upon a judgment rendered by the Principal Bench of this Tribunal on 27.11.2014 in RA No. 216/2014 in OA No. 3922/2013 R.S. Sehrawat vs Union of India.

In the said judgment, it was held that this Tribunal has no power to condone the delay in filing the Review Application. To the same effect is another judgment dated 12.03.2019 cited by learned counsel for the respondents in MA No. 194/2012 in RA No. 16/2012 in OA No. 14/2005 N.K. Purohit vs Union of India rendered by Jodhpur Bench of this Tribunal. Learned counsel still further relied upon a recent judgment of Bangalore Bench of this Tribunal in the matter of K. Chandrashekar and others vs Union of India (RA No. 170/41/2020 decided on 05.02.2021)

4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the review applicant submitted that this Tribunal has ample power and authority to condone the delay in filing the Review Application. In support of his argument, learned counsel placed reliance upon the following judgments:

(a) A Full Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa at Cuttack in Writ Petition (C) No. 5738/2008 Akshaya Kumar Parida (Dead) and after him Manoj Kumar Parida & Others vs Union of India & others decided on 03.02.2015. In the said case, the Hon’ble High Court of Orissa has held that in view of the provisions of Section 29 (2) of the Limitation Act, 1963 (hereinafter called as the ‘1963 Act’), this Tribunal has the jurisdiction to entertain the application for condonation of delay filed under Section 5 of the said Act. Rule 17 of the ‘1987 Rules’ does not take away the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain and dispose of the application under Section 5 of the ‘1963 Act’, since the applicability of the said Section has not been expressly excluded thereby.

(b) A Full Bench of the Hon’ble High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam considered the issue in ZIA. 210/2018 in O.P.(Kat) No. 87/2018 Haris K.M.

and Ors vs Jahfar K 2021 (1) SCT 154. After elaborate discussions, their Lords