Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11152

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Om Prakash VII, J, Mohan Pyare, A
Ramesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application No. 330/00331 of 2018

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri S.M. Ali, Shri S.S. Sharma, Shri Ravi Sharma
For the Respondents: Shri Ajay Kumar Rai

Delays in challenging disciplinary orders and the recognition of such delays as a bar to claims for retrospective promotion under the Administrative Tribunals Act.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Promotion matters - Denial of promotion citing disciplinary actions against the applicant, who challenged orders without filing within the limitation period - Actions by the authorities deemed valid as per statutory provisions - Appeals lack merit as no grounds for relief found. (Paras 6, 10, 14)

(B) Laches and Acquiescence - Delay in challenging disciplinary actions bars applicant from relief as the original penalty and its enhancement were acknowledged by the applicant's inaction over time. (Para 12)

Facts of the case:
The applicant, Ramesh Kumar, challenges the denial of promotion by the respondents citing past penalties and claims the process to promote juniors is discriminatory and arbitrary, violating Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

Findings of Court:
The court concludes that in light of the applicant's failures to challenge numerous orders within the statutory period, the relief claimed in the original application is unsubstantiated and the delays lead to a presumption of acceptance of the punishment imposed.

Issues: Key issues included whether disciplinary actions prevented the applicant from promotion, and if the applicant can claim promotions retrospectively despite not challenging prior orders timely.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the applicant's claims were barred by laches due to the significant delays in challenging adverse orders; the authority's actions were considered lawful based on the evidence presented.

Result: OA dismissed.

Table of Content
1. applicant's claims are based on alleged promotion denial due to past penalties. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments reference delays in challenging orders and promotion aspirations. (Para 6 , 7)
3. court affirms authority's right to enhance penalties and impacts on promotions. (Para 10 , 11 , 12)
4. court establishes principles governing late appeals are sufficient ground for dismissal. (Para 13 , 14)

By Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

The present original application has been filed by the applicant under section 19 of the AT Act, with the following reliefs:-

“8.1 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to set aside/quash the impugned order dated 7.7.2017 as issued (7.7.2017 as by the Sr. DPO, NCR, Jhansi, Respondent No. 4 being passed on totally false averments as mentioned in the impugned order as the minor penalty punishment dated 27.12.2001 and Revisionary enhanced penalty order dated 16.6.2002 were completed well before issue of provisional panel dated 30.11.2004 for promotion on the post of Head TTE Gr. Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 1.11.2003 against restructuring of cadre, promoting several juniors to the applicant.

Therefore, the impugned order dated 7.7.2017, issued by the Sr. DPO, NCR, Jhansi, Respondent No. 4 is arbitrary, malafide discriminatory and against statutory rules, The impugned order dated 7.7.2017 is in gross violation to Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

8.2 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the DRM, NCR, Jhansi, Respondent No. 3 to consider promotion of the applicant on the post of Head TTE Gr. Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 1.11.2003 against restructuring of cadre and to promote the applicant accordingly as there was nothing adverse against the applicant on or before the date of issue of provisional panel dated 30.11.2004 by the DRM, NCR, Jhansi promoting on the post of Head TTE Gr. Rs. 5000-8000/- w.e.f. 1.11.2003 against restructuring of cadre by the DRM, NCR, Jhansi and may kindly direct to allow all consequential benefits to the applicant in this respect.

8.3 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the DRM, NCR, Jhansi to issue promotion order of the applicant on the post of Chief Ticket Inspector Gr. Rs. 9300-34800 GP 4600 w.e.f. 26.10.2016 promoting juniors to the applicant on this post with all consequential benefits to the applicants.

8.4 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the DRM, NCR, Jhansi, Respondent No. 3 to make payment of arrear of pay on this account with interest @ 12% per annum.

8.5 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to award heavy cost in favour of the applicant so that he may get justice.

8.6 That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass any other order or direction as may in the facts and deem, fit and proper circumstances of the case”.

2. The brief facts of the case are that the present Original Application has been filed against the impugned order dated 07.07.2017, issued vide Letter No. P/PF/RK/Hd. TE/CA by the Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, NCR, Jhansi (Respondent No. 4), whereby the representation of the applicant dated 28.11.2016 was rejected. The said representation had been directed to be decided by the Tribunal in OA No. 485 of 2017 (Ramesh Kumar Vs. UOI & Others) vide order dated 27.04.2017. By the impugned order, the applicant was denied promotion to the post of Head TTE (Grade Rs. 5000-8000 RSRP) in the Commercial Department, Jhansi Division, against restructuring of cadre w.e.f. 01.11.2003, pursuant to DRM, NCR, Jhansi’s order dated 30.11.2004, whereby several juniors to the applicant were promoted in terms of Railway Board letters dated 09.10.2003 and 06.01.2004. Further grievance of the applicant is that he has also been denied promotion to the post of Chief Ticket Inspector (Grade Rs. 9300- 34800, GP 4600/-) w.e.f. 26.10.2016 by the DRM, Jhansi (Respondent No. 3), despite the fact that several of his juniors were promoted. The action

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 11152

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALOm Prakash VII, J, Mohan Pyare, ARamesh Kumar – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentOriginal Application No. 330/00331 of 2018

Delays in challenging disciplinary orders and the recognition of such delays as a bar to claims for retrospective promotion under the Administrative Tribunals Act.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Om Prakash VII, J, Mohan Pyare, A
Ramesh Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application No. 330/00331 of 2018