Rahul Kumar vs Union Of India Through The General Manager, North Central Railway, Subedarganj, Prayagraj. & Others

Pratima K Gupta, Member (J)

I have joined this Single Bench online through video conferencing.

Shri R.K. Dixit, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Charkapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents are present.

By way of this original application filed under section 19 of Administrative Tribunal Act 1985, the applicant seeks for the following reliefs:-

“i) The Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the claim of the applicant in lieu of death of his father as per Rule and with objective manner but not discharge mere formality.

ii) The Hon’ble Tribunal may further be pleased to pass any further writ, order or direction as deem fit and proper in the interest of justice.

iii) to award the cost of the application in favour of the applicant.”

The brief facts leading to this original application are that the father of the applicant Mithlesh Kumar died on 13.01.2013 while serving the respondents as Helper. The applicant claims that since then he is espousing his claim for seeking compassionate appointment by way of representations from time to time. However, the respondents have not informed him about the status of his claim. In Para 4.9 of the OA he claims that as many as 5 similarly placed persons have been given compassionate appointment since 2013.

Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents accepts notice on behalf of respondents and vehemently opposes this original application. He submits that the cause of action in the present OA arose way back in the year 2013 and there is a delay of 9 years in filing the present original application and the same is not accompanied by the delay condonation application, therefore, the same is not maintainable and is liable to be dismissed on account of delay itself.

However, at this stage learned counsel for the applicant confines his relief for seeking a direction to the respondents to decide the pending representation dated 06.08.2021 (Annexure A-6) within a stipulated time by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

However, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, no fruitful purpose will be served in keeping this matter pending and it is disposed off finally at the admission stage with the direction to respondents to consider and decide the representation dated 06.08.2021 (Annexure-A-6) of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The order so passed shall be communicated to the applicant without any delay.

It is made clear that the Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

There shall be no order as to costs.