Central Administrative Tribunal - Patna
Sanjay Kumar vs East Central Railway on 6 May, 2022
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PATNA BENCH, PATNA
O.A. No. 050/00311/20222 with MA 262/2022
Date of Order: 06.05.2022
CORAM
HON'BLE MR M.C. VERMA
VERMA, MEMBER [J]
1. Sanjay Kumar aged about 43 years, Male, S/o Bhagwan Das
Yadav, R/o Bandi Tola, Kalyanpur, Mainyara, Nimchak Bathani,
Atri, District-Gaya
District
.......... Applicant.
By Advocate :-
: Shri Shashi Bhushan Kumar
-Versus-
1. The Union of India through its Secretary, Railway Departme
Department,
nt,
Govt. of India, New Delhi Pin 110001.
2. The Director General, Postal Department New Delhi
Delhi-110001.
3. The Chief Postmaster General, Postal Department, Lucknow, Pin
code
code-226001.
4. The Superintendent RMS, BL Division Bareilly, UP
UP-243001.
5. The Inspector
Inspector Shahjahapur, Railway Post System BL Mandal
Muradabad, UP-244001.
UP
6. The Sub Divisional Inspector (North), Shahjahapur, Railway Postal
System BL Mandal Muradabad, UP UP- 244001.
7. The Bihar School Examination Board (Higher Secondary), Patna,
through its Secretary-800001.
Sec
8. The Chairman, Bihar School Examination Board, Patna
Patna-800001.
......... Respondents.
By Advocate :-
: Shri H.P. Singh
O R D E R (O R A L)
M.C. Verma, M[J]
1. Being aggrieved by order dated 21.05.2019 passed by the Superintendent Rail Post Service whereby applicant has been dismissed from service, service, present O.A has been preferred and is at notice stage hearing. Needless to say that prior to filing of O.A, applicant did prefer Writ Petition No. 170/2021 on the file of Hon'ble High Court of 2 Judicature cature at Patna and said Writ Petition was dismissed by the Hon'ble High Court on 15.12.2021, 15.12.2021 observing that the petitioner is a postal employee and remedy for redressal of his Grievance is available under the Tribunal's Act i.e. before the Central Admini dministrative strative Tribunal and giving liberty to applicant to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal for redressal of his grievance, grievance, the Writ Petition was disposed of by Hon'ble High Court and thereafter t this O.A has been preferred.
2. Shri Shashi Bhushan Kumar, Advocate appearing for applicant pressing the O.A. urged that while dismiss dismissing the writ petition liberty to O.A has been granted by Hon'ble High Court and explaining delay he submits that applicant during the departmental proceeding fell seriously y ill. He argued that order of the Disciplinary Authority is not legally tenable and therefore is this O.A. for quashing the order of Disciplinary Authority.
3. Shri H.P. Singh, Sr. Standing Counsel for respondents opposed the maintainability of the O.A and nd submits that against order of dismissal passed by the Disciplinary Authority, applicant was having right to appeal before the department but without exhausting that remedy, the O.A has beenn filed and therefore it is premature and cannot be entertained.
4. Considered the submission. it is not disputed that the order which is under challenge in present O.A can be assailed by way of departmental appeal provided under Rule 23 of CCS (CCA) Rules and remedy of appeal has not been exhausted by the applicant applicant.. The impugned order is of 31.05.2019, 9, the he appeal could be preferred within 45 days and said period 3 of limitation has already expired. If any appeal would be filed at this time that can also be dismissed by appellate authority stating that it is barred by limitation.
5. Having taken note of entirety, particularly the fact that applicant is agitating the matter continuously, continuously, though before wrong forum, hee previously has filed writ petition on the file of Hon'ble High Court and then has filed this O.A before this Tribunal so this O.A is being disposed of with some comments regarding limitation period as well. Liberty is granted to applicant to prefer departmental appeal within two weeks and if any such departmental appeal is preferred by the applicant within two weeks with request to condone the delay in filing appeal, the Appellate Authority shall consider the request for condonation of delay sympathetically and shall pass a reasoned and speaking final order relating to appeal as early as possibl possible. O.A stands disposed of accordingly. Pending MA, if any, also stand disposed of.
[M.C. Verma] Member [J] mks/-