SAMIR KUMAR SEN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) More than a decade after passing the order dated 18.10.1991 for reversion of the service of the petitioner to Group D, he woke up from the deep slumber and filed Original Application No.233 of 2008 for assailing the reversion order and also for a direction to the respondents to treat him as Junior Clerk (Group C) for the entire period from 10.12.1980 to 31.1.2008. Admittedly, the writ petitioner had already retired from service on superannuation on 30.1.2008.

(2.) The learned Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 5.4.2010 dismissed the O.A. No.233/2008 for the reasons that the petitioner who remained unmoved despite his reversion for years is precluded to contend that the cause of action is of continuing nature merely because it affect his pension for filing the original application assailing the reversion order and also that mere continuance for a long time in the capacity of Junior Clerk in connivance with the concerned staff would not secure a right to continue in service and also that sympathy cannot be claimed for protection of his service as Junior Clerk in the absence of finding that the reversion order is wholly illegal and unjust.

(3.) The factual matrix of the petitioner's case, in nutshell is recapitulated: