ANIL RAMDAS PAWAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties.

(2.) The petitioner has called in question the legality and correctness of the order in M.A.No.2145/2013 in O.A. No.2168/2013, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Camp at Nagpur (CAT), on 19.01.2018. By said order, the petitioner's application (M.A.No. 2145/2013), for condonation of delay in filing Original Application, came to be rejected, which is the subject matter of challenge.

(3.) The facts in brief are as such that, the petitioner was working as an Assistant General Manager, Telecom Department, Amravati with respondent no.2. The petitioner was nominated as one of the member of the Tender Evaluation Committee (TEC). The petitioner was served with a memorandum of charge on the allegations that he committed irregularities in accepting second lowest tender, thereby causing loss to the ex-chequer. An enquiry was held in which the petitioner was found guilty. The Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 22.08.2005, imposed punishment of reduction by three stages in the time scale of pay for a period of three years with further directions that he will not get any increments during the period of such reduction. The petitioner preferred a review petition, however, it was dismissed by the Authority vide order dated 07.05.2008. Being aggrieved by the order of penalty and rejection of review application, the petitioner preferred Original Application, challenging both the actions of respondent. Since there was delay of 5 years in challenging the impugned order of penalty and rejection of review, petitioner filed an application for condonation of delay. The said application for condonation of delay came to be rejected by the CAT under the impugned order.