ANIL KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 10.10.2017, passed by the Tribunal dismissing his O.A, praying inter alia for quashing and setting aside the seniority list of Senior Section Engineers (Sig), Section Engineers (Sig), JE-Ist (Sig) & JE-II (Sig) declared by the respondents/Northern Railway, as long back as on 24.07.2007 and for setting aside the letter dated 20.12013, informing the petitioner that his representation had been rejected.

(2.) The petitioner is also aggrieved by the letter dated 27.03.2014, issued by the respondents informing him that his representation for stepping up of his pay was not maintainable on the ground that it is not admissible to employees appointed in different seniority groups and he cannot seek any parity with employees who were given step up of pay, as they belong to another seniority group. Apart from the aforesaid orders, the petitioner has laid a challenge to the replies dated 14.07.14 and 17.09.15, furnished to him by the respondents, through RTI route.

(3.) By the impugned order, the Tribunal has dismissed the petitioner's O.A. on the ground that it is barred by limitation, as the orders challenged by him relate back to the years 2007, 2013, 2014 and 2015 and even after the petitioner's claim for seeking stepping up of pay was rejected by the respondents for the first time on 20.11.2013, instead of seeking legal recourse, he kept on submitting representations before the respondents which could not extend the period of limitation. The second observation made by the Tribunal for dismissing the petitioner's application was that he was seeking seniority over his alleged juniors, but had filed the OA without impleading them as parties.