Delay in filing represents an impediment to claim benefits under the Administrative Tribunal's Act despite changes in law.

JUDGMENT

Devan Ramachandran, J The petitioner challenges Ext.P2 order of the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench (CAT); and also Ext.P1 order which is consequential to it.

2. The petitioner was working as a Postman and says that he was entitled to his first ‘Modified Assured Career Progression Scheme’ (MACP) benefit on 01.04.1995; the second MACP benefit on 01.04.2005 and the third benefit thereunder from 01.04.2015. He admits that he never approached any authority seeking the third benefit; and explains that this is because there was a Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT) Circular against him at the relevant time. He says that, however, this Circular was challenged by someone in Delhi, which was allowed by the CAT; then confirmed by the Delhi High Court and finally by the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in the year 2021. He asserts that he was not aware of the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court till the year 2024; and that, on being so informed, he preferred Annexure A2 representation, dated 20.11.2024, before the Chief Postmaster General, Kerala Circle; which, when remained unconsidered, constrained him to move the learned CAT.

3. The petitioner complains that the learned CAT, however, did not even condone the delay in filing the Original Petition, thus to issue Ext.P2 order; which consequently lead to Ext.P1 order rejecting the said petition.

4. Smt.T.C.Govindaswamy – the learned counsel for the petitioner, submitted that the learned CAT ought to have allowed the application for condonation of delay, so that the Original Petition before it could have been considered on its merits. He argued that his client is now fully entitled to the benefit of the third MACP on account of the declarations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court; and hence that the frustration of his remedy, solely on the ground of delay, is inequitable and illegal.

5. Sri..T.V.Vinu - the learned Central Government Counsel, however, refuted the aforesaid submissions saying that, even as per the case of the petitioner, he claims to be entitled to the third MACP with effect from 01.04.2015; while he made the first representation for such only on 20.11.2024, which is nine years later. He argued that, in such perspective itself, the said representation becomes untenable; and consequently that the learned CAT was justified in not condoning the delay – which he asserted is much more than 689 days, as such been averred in the pleadings.

6. When we examine the impugned orders of the learned CAT, it becomes inevitable that it has considered the delay caused as being only 689 days, but to still hold that the petitioner is not entitled to the reliefs sought.

7. We must say that we find favour with the views of the learned CAT. Admittedly, the petitioner says that he became entitled to the third MACP benefit on 01.04.2015, when he completed 20 years of service from the first promotion. He explains that, however, he did not claim it because, there was a DoPT circular at the relevant time against him. It is thus clear that, even as per the petitioner, had he not known about the Supreme Court judgment, he would have never filed the representation before the Chief Postmaster General, which he did nearly nine years later.

8. The petitioner had obviously given up his claim, but was spurred into action only because he thought that he gets a window of opportunity through the Supreme Court judgment. However, there is an impediment he faces here also because, the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court - which has been produced on record as Annexure A3 - makes it limpid that it has been issued in the specific circumstances of the case decided, thus not to operate as a precedent, which is manifest from the fact that it has clarified that all questions of law are left open.

9. Consequently, even if the petitioner relies on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, he could obtain no benefit, unless he is able to establish his case against the DoPT circular.

10. It is luculent th