JARNAIL SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition prays for issuance of direction to the respondent to permit the joining of the petitioner in service. The aforementioned relief has been founded on the correspondence between the petitioner the respondent, Annexures P-13 to P-22, whereby the petitioner had written to the respondent for his reinstatement in service in pursuance to a judgment and decree of the Civil Court, dated 29.1.1986 (P-2). It is admitted position that the petitioner had joined as a casual labourer and worked with the respondent from 15.4.1979 to 30.6.1979. Thereafter he successfully passed the test on 2.8.1980. He worked as a Gateman at Dapar from 16.5.1980 to 28.2.1981. He was discharged in February 1981 by the Assistant Personnel Officer Northern Railway, New Delhi. He challenged the aforementioned order of discharge by filing a civil suit before the Civil Judge, Patiala, which was dismissed on 8.1.1985. The appeal filed by him was allowed, vide judgment and decree dated 29.1.1986 (Annexures P-2 and P-3). The aforementioned judgment and decree attained finality as the Civil Revision No. 1567 of 1986 was dismissed for non-prosecution on 18.8.1986. The petitioner entered into correspondence with the respondent authorities, which is Annexures P-13 to P- 22 and eventually filed execution of the judgment and decree on 20.11.2000. The Execution Application was dismissed on 11.10.2002 by holding that the cause of action to the petitioner had arisen when the order attained finality on 18.8.1986 and the execution could have been filed within 12 years taking the cause of action from 18.11.1986, which in fact was filed after 14 years. The aforementioned order passed by the Executing Court was challenged before the Additional District Judge, Patiala, on 6.11.2003, which met the same fate and a Civil Revision No. 116 of 2004 was dismissed by this Court on 25.1.2005, specifically observing that the execution was hopelessly time barred.

(2.) The petitioner has also filed O.A. No./T.A. No. T-27-PB of 1987, which was also dismissed on 23.10.1987.

(3.) After hearing learned counsel at a considerable length we find that the present petition is a sheer misuse of the process of the Court. The right of the petitioner has been adjudicated upon by the judgment and decree dated 29.1.1986, which has attained finality. Thereafter the execution filed to reap the fruits of the decree has been found to be hopelessly time barred as the remedy of execution was availed after more than 14 years. The order has been upheld by this court on 25.1.2005 (P-12).