Savitri vs Union Of India & Others Through

Nita Chowdhury, Member (A)

This MA has been filed by the review applicant seeking condonation of delay in filing the Review Application, vide which the review applicant is seeking to review the Order passed on 7.2.2019 in OA 2797/2017 and MA 3616/2017, and sought condonation of delay of 102 days in filing the Review Application. The instant MA as well as RA was filed on 12.7.2019.

As per the provisions of Section 22(3)(f) of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the review application has to be filed within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of the Order sought to be reviewed. The review applicant has pleaded in the instant MA that delay in finalizing the review application was on account that fee of the advocate was huge for her to bear as she is from middle class and could not arrange for funds and hence had to take some time to arrange for the some and further upon arranging the said money, the applicant also had to bring all the documents necessary for the same and as such it consumed time and thereafter this Hon'ble Tribunal was observing summer vacation and after when vacation was over, the applicant has preferred the Review Application As such the delay is neither wanton nor deliberate on the part of the review applicant but has been caused due to aforesaid reasons and, therefore, the same may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice.

However, this Tribunal found that the Order under Review was of 7.2.2019 and the Review Application along with this MA has been filed on 12.7.2019 and as such there is certainly a delay of more than 102 days in filing the Review Application, if the period of vacation of this Tribunal in June 2019 is excluded, otherwise total period of delay is 135 days. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of D.C.S. Negi vs. Union of India and others, in SLP (C) No.7956/2011 decided on 07.03.2011, has categorically held that the Administrative Tribunal is duty bound to first consider whether the application is within limitation, and further that the application can be admitted only if it is found to be within limitation or for any justified reason for extending the period of limitation. However, the explanations given in the MA for condonation of delay, as noted above, are not found to be satisfactory to enable this Court to condone the same, as it is not a case, which was dismissed on its merits but on the ground of delay and laches in filing the OA 2797/2017 despite knowing fully the fact that the OA was dismissed on the ground of delay and laches, the applicant had not taken appropriate steps in time to move the Review Application within the permissible time period.

In the result, and for the foregoing reasons, this Court does not find any sufficient reasons to condone the delay in filing the present Review Application and accordingly, the present MA is dismissed in circulation.