G.M. Chhattani vs Union of India

Instant petition is directed against order dt. 19.05.2011 passed by the ld. Central Administrative Tribunal.

The facts which can be noticed from present proceedings are that the petitioner joined service as Office Assistant on 31.08.1962 and after getting promotion in Gr.-II and thereafter in Gr.-III of Senior Section Supervisor retired from service after attaining the age of superannuation in July, 2000. His sole grievance was that the promotions were made w.e.f. 29.08.1995/17.01.1995 of the incumbents junior to him in the cadre and he has been deprived of his fair right of consideration for promotion to Gr.-IV.

Earlier Original Application came to be filed before the ld. Tribunal on 29.08.2008 jointly by seven applicants and all appears to have been retired personnels and at the relevant point of time were members of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (BSNL). Their Original Application came to be disposed of by the ld. Tribunal on the very date of its filing holding that the Original Application, preferred against BSNL, is not maintainable as it has not so far been notified U/S. 14(2) of the Act, 1985 and such service disputes could not be adjudicated by the ld. Tribunal in the absence of notification to be issued by the appropriate competent authority. It reveals from the record that after rejection of their Original Application holding it to be not maintainable before the ld. Tribunal, the BSNL was notified thereafter and a fresh Original Application was filed in 2009 jointly by seven applicants assailing promotions made in 1995 and their grievance was that as they being senior in the feeder cadre, their right of fair consideration has been seriously jeopardized by giving promotions to the incumbents who were admittedly junior to them in Gr.-III.

In response to the Original Application filed by them, reply was filed and while contesting claim of the applicants, it was averred that they all have retired from service between 1997-2001 and the Original Application came to be filed in 2009 which was highly belated & barred by limitation and at the same time, it was also averred that the applicants were not in the purview of promotion in Gr.-IV while in service and all of them retired in Gr.-III/Senior Section Supervisor and the so-called alleged juniors namely S.R. Pathik and M.L. Bhatt were promoted to Gr.-IV on their turn on 22.08.2001 and 15.07.2002 respectively and as regards their promotion dt. 17.01.1995, it was later on revised, as per order of promotion to Gr.-IV has been granted to the persons who are alleged to be junior, after the applicants have been retired from service and at least they cannot say that their right of fair consideration has been jeopardized.

The ld. Tribunal took note of the preliminary objection, as regards delay in filing of appeal and so also on being prima facie satisfied on merits as well, considered it appropriate not to entertain the OA at a belated stage filed by the applicants regarding alleged promotion, which too has been later on reviewed and persons finally got promotion of Gr.-IV after the retirement of applicants and there appears no justification to entertain their belated claim for consideration of promotion which otherwise may not subsist and their Original Application came to be dismissed vide order dt. 19.05.2011.

It may be noticed that initially seven applicants jointly filed Original Application before the ld. Tribunal and out of seven, six appears to have been satisfied in not availing further remedy, however, one of them, the present petitioner, approached this court by filing instant writ petition and his grievance is that there was no delay in filing the Original Application before the ld. Tribunal, as earlier promotion orders of 1995 were never brought to his notice and after it came to their notice, he made a representation and also served a notice for demand of justice and as per the legal advise extended to him, the Original Application came to be filed in 2008 and the ld. Tribunal while observing that BSNL has not been notified U/S. 14(2) of the Act, 1985 and service disputes could not be adjudicated by the ld. Tribunal, dismissed the Original Application holding not maintainable but immediately after issuance of notification for adjudicating the service disputes of BSNL before the ld. Tribunal, a fresh Original Application was filed in 2009 and in these facts & circumstances, the delay was neither belated nor could be attributed to the petitioner. However, submits that once the persons junior to him in the cadre have been promoted in 1995, his right of fair consideration has been seriously jeopardized.

As regards first question of delay is concerned, we too are of the view that the grievance raised by the petitioner is highly belated since the Legislature in its wisdom has provided one year of limitation in filing Original Application before the ld. Tribunal, however, if there is a reasonable delay that can always be considered, provided the pre-conditions being complied with.

In the instant case, according to the petitioner''s own case set up before the ld. Tribunal, the promotions were made in 1995 and for the first time the complaint was made by the petitioner before the ld. Tribunal by filing Original Application in 2008 itself, which was after almost 13 years of the alleged promotions and the ld. Tribunal even on merits has noticed that the promotion of few of the persons alleged, were revised and they were promoted to Gr.-IV after the retirement of the petitioner and at least at that point of time, the petitioner cannot claim that his right of fair consideration for promotion to Gr.-IV has been denied to him.

After going through order of the ld. Tribunal and the material which came on record and after hearing the petitioner, in person, we do not find any apparent manifest error committed by the ld. Tribunal under the order impugned which may require interference of this court.

Consequently, the instant petition is devoid of merit and accordingly dismissed.