Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Union Of India vs Binod Shahai on 12 January, 2011
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH NEW DELHI Misc. Application No.60/2011 in Original Application No.610/2010 This the 12th day of January, 2011 HONBLE SHRI JUSTICE V. K. BALI, CHAIRMAN HONBLE SHRI L. K. JOSHI, VICE-CHAIRMAN (A) Union of India Applicant (Respondent in OA) ( By Ch. Shamshuddin Khan, Advocate ) Versus Binod Shahai Respondent Applicant in OA) O R D E R Justice V. K. Bali, Chairman:
O.A. N0.610/2010 was decided by us vide order dated 2.11.2010. Operative part of the order reads, thus:
6. While allowing this Original Application, we direct the respondents to open the sealed cover of the applicant and on the basis of his records, if he is found fit for promotion, promote him accordingly, and in that event, the applicant would be entitled to all consequential benefits.
7. Let the exercise, as ordained above, be completed within a period of six weeks from today. There shall be no order as to costs. The order was to be complied with within six weeks, which period would expire by 14.12.2010.
2. Respondent in the OA has filed this misc. application seeking extension of time for completing the process as directed by this Tribunal. This application was filed on 21.12.2010 when the time stipulated had already expired. Counsel representing the respondent would contend that implementation of the directions of this Tribunal would require consultation of the nodal Ministries/Departments, i.e., DOP&T and Ministry of Law, which would take time, and, therefore, the time be extended by a period of three months. We hardly find any ground for extending the time. Once, the orders are passed by the Tribunal or Court, they have to be implemented unless challenged in higher judicial forum. There is no scope in the consultation that may take place to take a different view than the one taken by the Tribunal. To a specific question asked to the learned counsel as to whether the sealed cover has been opened or not, the curt reply is that the same has not been opened. What consultation would be required even to open the sealed cover, is not understandable to us. Even though, we find hardly any justification to extend the time, we, however, still by showing some indulgence in the matter, give the respondent in the OA three weeks more time to implement the order.
2. The misc. application stands disposed of.
( L. K. Joshi ) ( V. K. Bali ) Vice-Chairman (A) Chairman /as/