Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Darshan Singh vs Govt. Of Nctd on 13 May, 2025
1
Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015
Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi
O.A. No.3215/2015
This the 13th day of May, 2025
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)
Sh. Darshan Singh
S / o Sardar Inder Singh
Aged about 65 years
Retired as : Deputy Commissioner
Directorate of Industries,
Govt. of N CT of Delhi
R/o 282 Sainik Vihar,
Shakur Basti, Delhi-110034
...Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. A. K. Bhakt)
Versus
l. Lt Governor
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
1 Raj Niwas, Delhi· 110054
2. Chief Secretary
Govt. of N CT of Delhi
5th Floor, A-Wing, Delhi Secretariat
I.P. Estate, New Delhi-110002
3. The Chairman
public Grievances Commissioner
M-Block, Vikas Bhawan, New Delhi-110002
4. The Commissioner (Industries)
Govt. of NCT of Delhi
419, Udyog Sadan, Patpar Ganj,
Delhi-110092
...Respondents
(By Advocate : Mr. Awanish Kumar)
2
Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015
ORDER (ORAL)
By Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) The present Original Application, filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeks the following reliefs:
"a) To quash and set aside the impugned order dated 25.07.2012(Annexure-A/1 (Colly))
b) To direct the respondent is allow the stepping up of the applicant from 01.10.1986.
c) To pay the difference of pay and allowances to the applicant in a time bound manner with interest 18% from 01.10.1986, to date of payment.
d) To pass such others of further direction, as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit in the interest of justice.
e) To award the cost of this O.A."
2. The applicant, a retired DANICS officer, served as Deputy Commissioner in the Directorate of Industries, Govt. of NCT of Delhi. During his tenure as Superintendent (DASS) at L.N.J.P. Hospital, he represented to the respondents vide letter dated 24.03.1994, seeking benefits of pay and allowances at par with his junior due to the merger of cadres, as per this Tribunal's order dated 29.10.1993 in OA 2910/92 (V.V. Kashyap & Ors. vs. Delhi Administration & Anr.).
3
Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015 2.1 Despite the respondents implementing this
Tribunal's decision and granting higher pay and allowances to junior officers vide order No. 1296-1302 dated 29.11.1995, the applicant's request remained unattended. The applicant sent several reminders, but they went unanswered.
2.2 The applicant retired from service on 30.11.2009 upon attaining the age of superannuation. He then represented to the Chairman, Public Grievance Cell, seeking redressal of his grievance regarding stepping up of his pay and allowances and grant of other retiral benefits. The Hon'ble Member PGC vide letter No. 50499 dated 12.01.2012 closed the case on irregular grounds. The applicant appealed to the Lieutenant Governor (Appellate Authority) on 03.02.2012 and sent reminders on 28.08.2012 and 03.12.2012. However, no decision was conveyed to the applicant. 2.3 The applicant then filed OA No. 416/2013 before this Tribunal, seeking redressal of his grievance. The Tribunal vide order dated 10.03.2014 directed the respondents to consider the applicant's representation dated 09.09.2012 (erroneously mentioned instead of 4 Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015 03.02.2012) and pass a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks. As no order was passed, the applicant filed CP No. 402/2014 before the Tribunal. The Tribunal closed the CP vide order dated 03.12.2014, noting that the representation had been considered and rejected. However, the applicant disputes receiving a copy of the rejection order. 2.4 Subsequently, MA No. 289/2015 was filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal and was dismissed vide order dated 13.07.2015. Despite this, no decision has been taken on the applicant's representation dated 03.02.2012 to the Lieutenant Governor till date.
3. Learned counsel for the respondents vehemently opposes the relief sought by the applicant, relying on the averments made in the counter affidavit. It is submitted that the applicant's OA No. 219/2015 was disposed of on 04.10.2018, with the Tribunal directing that the applicant be treated as having been inducted into the entry grade of DANICS with effect from the year his immediate junior in the feeder category was inducted. However, the applicant was not entitled to any arrears on account of the change in date of induction. The Tribunal further directed that the 5 Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015 applicant's pension be revised within three months from the date of receipt of the order and that the revised pension be paid prospectively. 3.1 Learned counsel for the respondents draws our attention to the relief sought in OA No. 219/2015, which reads as under:-
"A) To quash and set aside the Impugned order dated 02-04-2014 (Annexure-A/1), wherein for the first time the respondents have declined the legitimate benefit to the applicant.
B) The Respondents be directed to facilitate the notional entry to Entry Grade of DANICS from appropriate date, as done In case of his juniors/ counterparts.
C) That It is therefore prayed that the applicant may be regularized from the date of his initial date of appointment as ad-hoc DANICS officer. D) That the Respondent be further directed to grant all other consequential benefits by re-fix his salary from the date of his Initial date of appointment of applicant as ad·hoc DANICS officer to the post of DANICS on regular basis.
E) That the Respondents be directed to disburse the arrears of re-fixed salary for the intervening period, along with Interest 18 % thereupon."
3.2 Furthermore, the respondents highlight that OA No. 416/2013 filed by the applicant was disposed of on 10.03.2014, with the Tribunal directing the respondents to consider the applicant's representation dated 09.09.2012 and pass a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks.
6
Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015 3.3 Learned counsel for the respondents also points
out that the present OA was dismissed for want of prosecution and non-compliance with the order dated 15.09.2015 on 26.10.2015. Subsequently, the applicant approached the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, and later filed M.A. No. 790/2019 seeking condonation of delay and M.A. No. 791/2019 seeking restoration of OA No. 3215/2015. Both of these applications were disposed of on 11.01.2023.
4. We have heard learned counsel for both the parties and perused the material available on record.
5. Based on the contentions raised by both parties, it appears that the applicant's grievance regarding stepping up of pay and allowances has been partially addressed through previous litigation. It is evident that the applicant's grievance has already been addressed in previous OAs, specifically OA No. 219/2015 and OA No. 416/2013.
6. In view of the fact that the applicant's grievance has already been adjudicated upon in previous OAs, and the present OA raises similar issues and seeks similar reliefs, we are of the considered opinion that the present OA is barred by the principle of res 7 Item No.35/ C-V O.A. No.3215/2015 judicata. Notably, the order in OA No. 219/2015 has attained finality, and the applicant cannot seek to reopen the same issues in the present OA.
7. It is pertinent to note that OA No. 219/2015 and the present OA were originally intended to be heard together. However, due to the present OA being dismissed for want of prosecution, this could not be done. Despite the subsequent restoration of the present OA, the fact remains that the issues raised herein have already been addressed in OA No. 219/2015, which has attained finality.
8. Allowing the applicant to relitigate the same issues would amount to an abuse of the judicial process. Accordingly, we dismiss the present OA on the ground of similarity with previous OAs and the finality of the order in OA No. 219/2015.
9. Pending MAs, if any, shall also stand disposed of accordingly.
10. No order as to costs.
(Dr. Anand S Khati) (Manish Garg)
Member (A) Member (J)
/sm/