AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 19069/2025 (Exemption)
Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 4105/2025 & CM APPLs. 19068/2025, 19070/2025
This petition has been filed by the petitioners, challenging the Order dated 18.01.2024 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as, ‘learned Tribunal’) in Original Application No. 728/2023 (hereinafter referred to as, ‘O.A.’) titled as Ravi Pratap v. Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors., allowing the said O.A. filed by the respondent herein with the following directions:-
“8.As a sequel to this, the respondents are directed to restore the offer of appointment to the applicant forthwith and, subject to his fulfilling other eligibility requirements, appoint him as Patwari, a post to which he has been selected on his own merits in his respective category. Pursuant to his appointment, the applicant shall be entitled to all consequential benefits including, but not restricted to, seniority and appropriate fixation of pay allowances with effect from the date other successful candidates of the subject selection process have been given appointment. The consequential benefits shall be accorded to him on notional basis till the date he assumes charge of his position and on actual basis thereafter.”
The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that while the direction of the learned Tribunal to offer appointment to the respondent has been duly complied with, however, the petitioners are aggrieved with the direction of the learned Tribunal granting consequential benefits, including but not restricted to seniority and appropriate fixation of pay allowances to the respondent with effect from the date of the appointment of other successful candidates in the selection process in question. These consequential benefits have been directed to be given to the respondent on a notional basis till he assumes charge of his position and on an actual basis thereafter.
At the outset, we would note that the present petition has been filed after a delay of more than a year and no explanation has been given by the petitioners for this delay. In view of the unexplained delay, we refuse to exercise our extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India in the present petition.
The present petition along with applications is, accordingly, dismissed, leaving the question of law open.