Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2018) 07 CAT CK 0123

Hari Om Sharma vs Govt. Of NCT Of Delhi And Ors

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 9 July 2018

HON’BLE JUDGES
V. Ajay Kumar, J · Praveen Mahajan, Member (A)
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
Miscellaneous Application No. 2705 Of 2017, Original Application No. 2467 Of 2017

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

6 paragraphs · 385 words

V. Ajay Kumar, J

1.

The applicant is presently working as ASI (Executive) in respondents-Delhi Police and filed the OA seeking to quash the order of penalty imposing the punishment of withholding of next increment for a period of 2 years permanently vide order dated 11.10.2007, Corrigendum dated 15.10.2007 and the appellate order dated 21.01.2008 (Annexure A-2). The applicant has also filed the MA seeking condonation of delay of 3455 days in filing the OA.

2.

Heard Shri Anil Singal, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri K.M. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the pleadings on record.

3.

It is specifically stated in the MA filed by the applicant that though the appeal against the punishment order was disposed of by an order dated 21.01.2008 but the same was not served on him till 16.09.2016, on which date it was supplied to him when he applied under the RTI Act. Accordingly, the applicant submits that though he filed the MA seeking condonation of delay of 3455 days but, in fact, there is no delay as the OA was filed within time from the date of knowledge of dismissal of the appeal, i.e., within one year from 16.09.2016. Though the respondents filed the reply to the MA but they have not denied the fact of not serving the appellate order till the year 2016. However, they submit that the period of limitation commences from the date of passing of the order and not from the date of knowledge of the applicant.

4.

We cannot accept the submission of the respondents. Though the applicant is also under obligation to pursue his statutory appeal made against the punishment order, but in the peculiar circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice and since the condonation of delay, though substantial, does not adversely affect the rights of any other individual, the delay in the instant case deserves to be condoned.

5.

In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, the delay in filing the OA is condoned and accordingly, the MA is allowed subject to payment of cost of Rs.5000/- (Rupees Five Thousand Only) payable to the Delhi Legal Services Authority within 3 weeks from the date of receipt of this order. On payment of the same, list the OA for admission on 16.08.2018.