Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Central Administrative Tribunal - Gauhati

Ram Asare Yadav vs M/O Railways on 30 May, 2023

4/22/24, 11:52 AM cis.cgat.gov.in/catlive/internal/order_content_view.php?no=4037 CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL GUWAHATI Order Sheet Item no.: 14 M.A./50/2020 (GUWAHATI) No of Adjournment: 6 [ CONDONATION OF DELAY ] In Order Dated: 30/05/2023 O.A./149/2020 Court No.: 1 RAM ASARE YADAV Vs M/O RAILWAYS For Applicant(s) Advocate :

For Respondent(s) Advocate :

Notes of The Registry Order of The Tribunal M.A. No. 50/2020 The instant M.A. has been filed by the petitioner praying for condonation of delay of 2 years in filing the O.A. As per the petitioner, he appeared in the departmental examination for promotion from Grade - D post to Grade - C post against the notification dated 27.11.2016.

2. According to the petitioner, under the RTI, he received the answer script wherefrom he came to know that two answers were not evaluated by the respondents. Therefore, he made a representation dated 04.08.2017 for review of the answer script which was rejected by the respondents vide letter dated 28.08.2017 on the ground that there is no provision or scope for any review of the answer script. However, subsequently, he got the information that in case of another employee, the respondents had reviewed the answer script. Since he is a Grade - D employee, therefore, he is not aware of the Railway Rules. Hence, there is a delay occured in filing the O.A. However, Sri A. Lal, learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that he has arguable case on merit. But unless and until delay part will be condoned, the petitioner will suffer irreparable loss and injury.

3. However, Ms. U. Das, learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently objected to the contention of the petitioner and submitted since he did not get qualifing marks, therefore, he was not promoted to Grade - C posts. As per the respondents, the petitioner made a representation in the year 2017 and he had approached this Tribunal in the year 2020 only. Further, https://cis.cgat.gov.in/catlive/internal/order_content_view.php?no=4037 1/2 4/22/24, 11:52 AM cis.cgat.gov.in/catlive/internal/order_content_view.php?no=4037 according to her, ignorance of law is not an excuse to approach before the court.

4. Heard both the parties. Since the petitioner is having an arguable case on merit, for the ends of justice, we condoned the delay in filing the O.A.

5. Accordingly, M.A. stands disposed of.

Heard the parties.

2. Since Ms. U. Das, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the respondent, therefore, issuance of notices to them are dispensed with. However, applicant is directed to serve extra copies of the application to the learned counsel for the respondents.

3. Respondents are directed to file written statement by four weeks. Rejoinder, if any, be filed by the applicant by two weeks thereafter.

4. Let the matter be listed on 16.08.2023 under the heading for 'Orders'.

                                                  DR. SUMEET JERATH                              SMT. URMITA DATTA (SEN)
                                                  MEMBER (A)                                                 MEMBER (J)


                                                /bd/




https://cis.cgat.gov.in/catlive/internal/order_content_view.php?no=4037                                                     2/2