PARTAP SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) <DJG>SANJAY KISHAN KAUL</DJG> An advertisement was issued by BSNL, Haryana Circle, Ambala, in the year 1992 to fill up 14 vacancies of Junior Telecom Operators (JTO) in the reserved category. These vacancies arose out of a backlog up to the year 1991. The two petitioners before the Court also applied and were selected. The latter aspect stands clarified by the subsequent communication dated 13.4.1994 of the department to remove any understanding to the contrary that the backlog was for the year 1991 alone. The names of the petitioners were accordingly shown in the gradation list which was finalised in the year 1994.

(2.) AN issue was sought to be made vide representations of June, 1999 and 10.7.1999 as to the aforesaid aspect, i.e., whether the recruitment was for vacancies only of the year 1991 or up to 1991 as the recruitment year given to the petitioners was of the year 1992. Not having assailed the aspect earlier, in order to create a cause of action, a representation was made in the year 1999 in this behalf which was rejected and from that date cause of action was claimed.

(3.) AT the final stage of consideration of the O.A., the aforesaid aspect was noticed that the claim would be barred by limitation as the representations stood rejected in 1994 and the aspect of condonation of delay was only qua the alleged three months of delay by seeking to create the cause of action of 1999 and by merely making repeated representations on the same cause fresh cause of action cannot be created. The O.A. was, thus, found to be barred by time as the O.A. was filed on 26.12.2000. The grievance, as noticed above, was qua the recruitment being treated as one of 1992 which arose at that stage of time and at best when the gradation list was finalised. The delay was actually, thus, of six years.