Advocates:
['JK KAUSHIK', 'AK KAUSHIKAK KAUSHIK JK MISHRA', 'AK KAUSHIK', 'SANJAY PAREEK VIMAL MATHUR AGC']

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN

AT JODHPUR

: O R D E R :

D.B. Civil Writ Petition No.546/2009.

(Gordhan Lal Berwa Vs. Union of India & Others)

DATE OF ORDER : March 03, 2010

P R E S E N T

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.M. KAPADIA

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOPAL KRISHAN VYAS

_________________________________________

Mr. J.K. Kaushik for the petitioner.

Mr. Ajit Singh for Mr. Sanjay Pareek for

the respondent(s).

Mr. Vimal Mathur, Addl. Govt. Counsel.

BY THE COURT : (Per Hon'ble Mr. Vyas, J.)

In this writ petition, while challenging order dated

03.08.2007 passed by the Central Administrative

Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Original Application

No.96/2007, the petitioner has prayed for the following

relief :

“(i). To issue a writ of certiorari and

quash the impugned judgement dated

3.8.2007 Annexure-9 passed in OA

NO.96/2007 along with MA No. 109/2007

and order dated 27.12.2007 (ANNEXURE-

11) passed in RA No. 15/2007

Gowerdhan Lal Berwa VS. Union of India

and Ors. by the Hon'ble CAT at Jodhpur.

The case may be decided on merits and

the reliefs claimed in the Original

Application may be allowed to the

2

petitioner.

(ii). That any other writ, direction, reliefs,

or orders may be passed in favour of the

petitioner which may be deemed just and

proper under the facts and circumstances

of this case.”

According to facts of the case, the petitioner was

appointed on the post of Divisional Accountant at

Banswara vide order dated 04.08.1995 and promoted

to the post of Divisional Accounts Officer Gr.-II with

effect from 30.06.2003 in the first instance. However,

vide order dated 06.05.2005, the date of promotion to

the post of Divisional Accounts Officer Gr.-II came to be

ante dated from 03.06.2003 to 01.01.2001 and name

of the petitioner was placed at S.No.73. Further, the

petitioner was promoted to the post of Divisional

Accounts Officer Gr.-I vide order dated 27.05.2005 with

effect from 01.04.2004 and his name was placed at

S.No.38 in the said order.

Aggrieved by the date of promotion on the post of

Divisional Accounts Officer Gr.-I with effect from

01.04.2004 instead of 01.01.2004, the petitioner filed

representation. However, when no response to the

representation was made and some of the DAOs were

further promoted to the posts of Sr. DAOs vide letter

dated 08.01.2007, the petitioner invoked jurisdiction of

3

the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench,

Jodhpur and filed Original Application No.96/2007 in

which following main prayer was made :

“8.2. The promotion granted to the

applicant to the post of Divisional Accounts

Officer Grade-I, w.e.f. 01.04.2004 may

kindly be declared contrary to the rules

and respondents be directed to grant

promotion to the applicant to the post of

Divisional Accounts Officer Grade-I, w.e.f.

01.01.2004.”

Along with the aforesaid original application filed

by the petitioner, a miscellaneous application for

condonation of delay was also filed, in which, reasons

for condoning the delay in filing the original application

were mentioned. But, the learned Tribunal dismissed

the original application as well as miscellaneous

application vide order impugned dated 03.08.2007 in

limine as barred by limitation.

At the threshold, learned counsel appearing on

behalf of the petitioner submits that in the

miscellaneous application filed by him for condonation

of delay though he has assigned reason that he was

under bona fide impression that the authorities are

considering his case in proper manner sympathetically

in accordance with rules, therefore, the delay was

caused, and, hence it was prayed that the delay in filing

4

the original application may be condoned; but, the

learned Tribunal while dismissing the miscellaneous

application also dismissed the original application and

strictly observed that limitatio