Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2020) 11 CAT CK 0089

Rohtas Kumar vs Chief Secretary Govt. Of NCT Of Delh & Others

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 23 November 2020

HON’BLE JUDGES
Aradhana Johri, Member (A)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 1878 Of 2020

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

16 paragraphs · 287 words

Aradhana Johri, Member (A)

1.

The applicant is a driver in DTC. He has filed this OA for review of orders dated 27.01.2000, 26.04.2007, 21.11.2014, 15.01.2015, 16.02.2015,

13.10.2015, 08.05.2019 and 15.09.2019, by which annual increments were withheld by way of punishment. He has also sought to review the period of

suspension which was done by orders dated 23.05.1995, 18.08.2006, 28.09.2011 and 30.05.2017 and paid full salary. He has challenged the order

dated 10.6.2020 by which a representation dated 05.9.2019 relating to penalties inflicted in bygone years, has been rejected.

2.

The applicant has claimed that withheld increments and salary be paid to him on the grounds that he has suffered due to unfair labour practices

adopted.

3.

Shri Ajesh Luthra, learned counsel appearing on advance notice on behalf of respondents has stated that various penalty orders given over a period

of time from 1995 onwards have not been challenged and have attained finality. Withholding of increments would be as a consequence of the penalty

which was inflicted due to various acts of misconduct. After a lapse of so many years, the applicant cannot challenge the said order and the OA is

hopelessly time barred. Further, the applicant has not sought condonation of delay.

4.

Heard Shri Pratap CH Mishra learned counsel for applicant and Shri Ajesh Luthra learned counsel for respondents and perused the OA.

5.

It is amply clear that withholding of increments and full salary is a consequence of several penalty orders inflicted on the applicant from time to

time, the oldest being of 1995, as a consequence of certain acts of misconduct. Therefore, at this stage, the matter is hopelessly time barred and

cannot be entertained.

O.A is dismissed. No order as to costs.