MOHAMMED SAKIR Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CALLING in question tenability of an order dated 29.10.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bench Jabalpur (hereinafter referred to as 'CAT') in M.A. No. 987/2013, dismissing a prayer made for restoration of O.A. No. 36/2006, this writ petition has been filed.

(2.) FACTS in brief, go to show that one Mohammed Rafique was working in the Railway Establishment, he died in harness on 28.12.1979. At that point of time, he was a Mukadam in the Loco -shed at Satna. After his death, it seems that petitioner, his son, was seeking compassionate appointment. When his claim was not considered and decided, he filed an application before CAT, which was registered as O.A. No. 36/2006. However, on 11.5.2006, the application was dismissed for want of prosecution. After the Original Application bearing No. 36/3006 was dismissed on 11.5.2006, petitioner did not take any action for more than seven years and it is only after seven years that the Misc. Appeal was filed for restoration of the Original Application.

(3.) THE delay of seven years in filing the application for restoration was explained by contending that the counsel, who was appearing the petitioner/applicant, did not inform the applicant, the counsel whenever contacted on phone used to tell the applicant that the matter is pending and it is only when the petitioner/applicant came to Jabalpur in July, 2013, that he was apprised of the fact of dismissal of his application, and he took steps for restoration of the same. The Tribunal dealt with the matter and found that there is delay of more than seven years in filing the application for restoration. The same has not been properly explained and a bald statement is made that the counsel did not apprise. The Tribunal holding that the delay is not properly explained dismissed the application for restoration and, therefore, this writ petition.