R.M. PATHAN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner before us, who is now a retired employee and a Senior Citizen, has prayed to quash and set aside the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad, Dated: 11.07.2003, rejecting O.A. No. 16 of 1998 and to grant the reliefs claimed by him in the original application. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition, reads as under;

(2.) THE petitioner, herein, joined the services with the respondents from 05.03.1958 as LDC and he was promoted to the post of UDC in the year 1967. It appears that, then, the case of the petitioner was referred to DPC for confirmation. However, due to some adverse remarks, the recommendations of DPC were kept in a sealed cover and the petitioner was reverted to the post of LDC vide order dated 05.04.1977. The petitioner, hence, preferred S.C.A. No. 1949 of 1980 before this Court, challenging the aforesaid order. This Court directed the respondents to treat the representation of the petitioner, Dated: 19.03.1977, as an appeal and to dispose of the same by 31.07.1983. Pursuant thereto, the respondents passed the order dated 29.07.1983 and set aside the reversal order of the petitioner dated 05.04.1977 and the case of the petitioner was again placed before review DPC for confirmation on the post of UDC. By virtue of the recommendations made by the review DPC vide its order dated 05.02.1987, the petitioner came to be confirmed on the post of UDC w.e.f. 01.01.1984. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner made a representation dated 30.06.1987 before the respondents, which came to be rejected on 02.05.1988. The petitioner, therefore, again approached this Court by way of S.C.A. No. 1377 of 1988 and this Court vide its order dated 30.10.1992 disposed of the said petition, directing the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum. The petitioner, then, preferred O.A. 463 of 1992 before the Tribunal, claiming various reliefs. The Tribunal disposed of the aforesaid O.A. vide its order dated 09.11.1993, directing the respondents to consider revised deemed date of confirmation and to convene a review DPC to consider the case of the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, DPC passed an order dated 25.04.1994, fixing the date of confirmation of the petitioner w.e.f. 26.07.1979. However, the petitioner was not satisfied with the said order, since, he was placed below one R.V. Munia, who was confirmed on the post of UDC on 15.02.1979, and above one J.H. Parmar, who was confirmed on the post of UDC on 29.08.1979, and hence, he challenged the findings of the review DPC as well as the speaking order passed by the respondents by way of O.A. 16 of 1998. The tribunal, then, rejected the said O.A. on the ground of limitation as well as on merits, against which, the petitioner preferred R.A. No. 8 of 2004 along with M.A. Of 65 of 2004 in O.A. 16 of 1998, which also came to be dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 11.06.2004. Hence, the present petition.

(3.) IN view of the above, it is submitted by the respondents that now nothing remains to be done in the matter. Pursuant to the above, the petitioner was also given the seniority, and therefore, no fault can be found with the observations made by the Tribunal in Para -1 of the order passed in O.A. 163 of 1992. The observations made by the Tribunal at Paragraph -9 of its order dated 11.07.2003, passed in O.A. 16 of 1998 reads as under;