Central Administrative Tribunal - Jodhpur
Smt Shanta Bai vs M/O Railways on 10 April, 2026
1
MA 290/00218/2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR
Miscellaneous Application No. 290/00218/2025
In C.P. No. 81/2025 in OA No. 213/2014
Pronounced on : 10.04.2026
Reserved on : 12.02.2026
CORAM
HON'BLE Mr JUSTICE RAMESHWAR VYAS, MEMBER (J)
HON'BLE Dr AMIT SAHAI, MEMBER (A)
Smt Shantabai wife of Shri Ambalal, aged about 66 years,
resident of House No. 107, Shastrinagar (Khempura)
Pratapnagar Road, Udaipur-313001, (M-9672902649), last
employed on the post of Safaiwala in the office of Station
Superintendent, Ranapratapnagar, NWR .
.......Applicant
By Advocate : Mr Ajay Kumar Kaushik.
Versus
1. Shri Amitabha, General Manager, North-Western Railways,
Hqrs. Jaipur Zone, Chainpura, Jagatpura, Jaipur,
Rajasthan-302017.
2. Shri Raju Bhutada, Divisional Railway Manager, NWR,
Ajmer Division, Ajmer-305001.
......Respondents
By Advocate : Mr B.L. Tiwari.
Digitally signed by SUDESH SHAKHI
SUDESH
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
OU=JODHPUR BENCH, Phone=
a27c6e3b70871625348f2a3c0c55c745e5a539aa4870db26
99074ca1c35d078c, PostalCode=342006, S=Rajasthan,
SERIALNUMBER=
F709B6DE94E2153CCFD55F34387F3BB788E0FF850A83
SHAKHI
262E2D1BB72EA7ADF651, CN=SUDESH SHAKHI
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2026.04.27 14:19:43+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
2
MA 290/00218/2025
ORDER
Per : Hon'ble Mr Justice Rameshwar Vyas The instant order shall decide the MA seeking condonation of delay caused in filing the present Contempt Petition No. 81/2025.
1.1 As per facts of the case, the petitioner being aggrieved with not reviewing her suspension order within 90 days filed OA No. 213/2014 before this Bench seeking direction against the respondents to pay her salary and allowance for the period from 28th March, 2013 (date of expiry of ninety days from the date of suspension) till his joining duty on 22nd January, 2016. After hearing the parties and perusing the material available on record, OA was allowed vide order dated 03.11.2023 by quashing and setting aside suspension order dated 28.12.2013. The respondents were directed to treat the period from 28.12.2023 to 22.01.2016, as period spent on duty, with regular pay and allowances subject to adjustment of any subsistence allowance paid to the applicant. The respondents were also directed to complete the entire exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order.
1.2 The above order has not been complied with by the respondents till date, contended learned counsel for the applicant. Submitting that the above order was communicated to the respondents vide letter dated Digitally signed by SUDESH SHAKHI SUDESH DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=JODHPUR BENCH, Phone= a27c6e3b70871625348f2a3c0c55c745e5a539aa4870db26 99074ca1c35d078c, PostalCode=342006, S=Rajasthan, SERIALNUMBER= F709B6DE94E2153CCFD55F34387F3BB788E0FF850A83 SHAKHI 262E2D1BB72EA7ADF651, CN=SUDESH SHAKHI Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.04.27 14:19:43+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 3 MA 290/00218/2025 11.01.2024 (Annex. CP/2) but the respondents neither granted due benefits nor communicated any reasons for non-
execution of the order. The order passed by this Bench has also not been assailed before the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court.
1.3 For the delay caused in filing the CP, the applicant has filed the instant MA with the averment that she has been pursuing her cause consistently, diligently and inquiring from dealing officers from time to time and was told to wait as the matter was in process but the respondents have not complied the directions issued in the OA.
1.4 As per objection raised by the respondents, provisions of Section 20 of Contempt of Courts Act prescribe limitation period of one year from the date of contempt alleged to have been committed. Relying upon the law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Pallav Sheth v. Custodian, 2001 (0) AIJEL-SC 20594, it is contended that this Tribunal has no power to ignore the provisions of limitation according to which, a Contempt Petition can be filed within a period of one year from the date of alleged contempt.
2. Having regard to the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and material available on record, at the outset we would like to mention that Central Administrative Tribunal in exercise of powers conferred by Section 23 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971, read with Section 17 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and all other powers Digitally signed by SUDESH SHAKHI SUDESH DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=JODHPUR BENCH, Phone= a27c6e3b70871625348f2a3c0c55c745e5a539aa4870db26 99074ca1c35d078c, PostalCode=342006, S=Rajasthan, SERIALNUMBER= F709B6DE94E2153CCFD55F34387F3BB788E0FF850A83 SHAKHI 262E2D1BB72EA7ADF651, CN=SUDESH SHAKHI Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.04.27 14:19:43+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 4 MA 290/00218/2025 enabling it in this behalf, made the rules called 'The Central Administrative Tribunal (Contempt of Courts) Rules, 1992' [hereinafter referred to as CAT Contempt of Court Rules]. Rule 22 of these rules provides that in matters not specifically provided for in these rules, the procedure prescribed in the relevant rules of the Tribunal as amended from time to time shall mutatis mutandis apply to proceedings under these rules. In view of the above enabling provision, we are of the view that provisions with regard to limitation in contempt proceedings are also governed by the provisions of Section 21 of the ATA, 1985.
As per provisions of Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the limitation period is one year from the date on which final order has been made. However, in cases where appeal or representation has not been decided, application can be made within one year from the date of expiry of period six months of filing of appeal or representation. As per sub section (3) of Section 21, an application may be admitted after a period of one year specified in clause (a) Clause (b) of sub-Section (1) or, as the case may be, the period of six months specified in sub-section (2), if the applicant satisfies the Tribunal that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within limitation period.
Perusal of the above provisions reveal that the tribunal has been given power to condone the delay caused in filing the OA. Since the CAT Contempt of Court Rules has not Digitally signed by SUDESH SHAKHI SUDESH DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=JODHPUR BENCH, Phone= a27c6e3b70871625348f2a3c0c55c745e5a539aa4870db26 99074ca1c35d078c, PostalCode=342006, S=Rajasthan, SERIALNUMBER= F709B6DE94E2153CCFD55F34387F3BB788E0FF850A83 SHAKHI 262E2D1BB72EA7ADF651, CN=SUDESH SHAKHI Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.04.27 14:19:43+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 5 MA 290/00218/2025 specifically dealt with the issue of limitation, we are of the view that provisions of Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 shall apply mutatis mutandis to CAT Contempt of Court Rules. According to Section 21 of the Act, this tribunal has been given power to admit an application beyond the period of limitation after satisfying itself that the applicant had sufficient cause for not making application within such period. The technical objection raised by the Railways in regard to this tribunal not having powers to condone the delay in the matters of Contempt of Court Act is devoid of any merit, hence, overruled.
The judgments cited by learned counsel for the respondents passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Pallav Sheth (supra) and Maheshwar Peri v High Court of Judicature at Allahbad, 2016 (0) AIJEL-SC 58953 do not debar the Tribunal to entertain the instant CP.
3. In the instant matter, despite clear direction from this tribunal to treat the period from 28.12.2013 to 22.01.2016, as period spent on duty, with regular pay and allowances subject to adjustment of any subsistence allowance paid to the applicant, the respondents neither challenged the order passed by this tribunal nor complied with the direction issued in the OA and that too without assigning any reason. The respondents were directed to complete the entire exercise within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order but they have not complied with the same Digitally signed by SUDESH SHAKHI SUDESH DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=JODHPUR BENCH, Phone= a27c6e3b70871625348f2a3c0c55c745e5a539aa4870db26 99074ca1c35d078c, PostalCode=342006, S=Rajasthan, SERIALNUMBER= F709B6DE94E2153CCFD55F34387F3BB788E0FF850A83 SHAKHI 262E2D1BB72EA7ADF651, CN=SUDESH SHAKHI Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.04.27 14:19:43+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 6 MA 290/00218/2025 despite petitioner supplying a copy of the same vide letter dated 11.01.2024 (Annex. CP/2) to the respondents. We cannot expect an organization of the Government not to obey a judicial verdict that too without any valid reason.
4. The applicant filed CP No. 81/2025 before this tribunal on 11.08.2025 along with MA seeking condonation of delay of four months in filing the Contempt Petition. We accept the reasons mentioned by the petitioner to condone the delay of approximately four months in filing the Contempt Petition. Accordingly, the MA is allowed in terms of enabling provision under sub-section (3) of Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
5. While rejecting the objection raised by the respondents and condoning the delay in filing the Contempt Petition, we grant three months' time to the respondents to comply with the order dated 03.11.2023 passed in OA No. 213/2014 failing which the erring officers shall be dealt with in accordance with the 'The Central Administrative Tribunal (Contempt of Courts) Rules, 1992'.
6. List the Contempt Petition on 25.05.2026.
Order dasti to all concerned.
(Amit Sahai) (Rameshwar Vyas)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
ss
Digitally signed by SUDESH SHAKHI
SUDESH
DN: C=IN, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, OU=JODHPUR BENCH, Phone= a27c6e3b70871625348f2a3c0c55c745e5a539aa4870db26 99074ca1c35d078c, PostalCode=342006, S=Rajasthan, SERIALNUMBER= F709B6DE94E2153CCFD55F34387F3BB788E0FF850A83 SHAKHI 262E2D1BB72EA7ADF651, CN=SUDESH SHAKHI Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2026.04.27 14:19:43+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0