Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 2]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

Union Of India & Others vs Sh. Narender Pal on 30 September, 2011

      

  

  

 Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench

M.A.No.2240/2011
in
O.A.No.432/2011

New Delhi, this the     30th    day of   September, 2011

Honble Shri Shailendra Pandey, Member (A)

Union of India & Others 					 Applicants in MA

(By Advocate: Sh. B.K.Berera)

	Versus

Sh. Narender Pal 						 Respondent in MA

(By Advocate: Sh. R.P.Sharma)

O R D E R (in MA 2240/2011)

MA 2240/2011 has been filed by the respondents in OA 432/2011 for clarification of the Tribunals order dated 30.05.2011, passed in OA 432/2011.

The learned counsel for the respondent in MA has stated that the MA is not maintainable as in terms of Section 27 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 the order of the Tribunal disposing of an application is final and cannot be called in question. It is further stated the present application is in fact an application for review of the Tribunals order in the guise of an MA for clarification. Therefore, he prays that the MA be dismissed as not maintainable.

2. We have heard the learned counsel for both the parties.

3. The order passed in OA is a detailed one and speaks for itself. To remove any ambiguity in the minds of the applicants in the MA (the respondents in the OA), we had initially thought of removing any doubts that they had in the matter, but the counsel for the respondent in MA (counsel for the applicant in the OA) repeatedly insisted that the MA should not be allowed, even after it was mentioned to him that a clarificatory order may help the applicant towards getting the amounts that had been ordered for payment in the final order passed in the aforesaid OA expeditiously.

4. In view of the repeated insistence of the learned counsel for the respondent in MA that there is no need for clarification, we refrain from passing any clarificatory order.

However, it is noticed that the order of this Tribunal had been passed on 30.05.2011 and a copy of the order had been served on the respondents on 2.06.2011 but the present MA has been filed on 19.08.2011, after the expiry period of compliance of one month (no reasons have been mentioned in the MA that why they could not file the MA for clarification within the compliance period). 5. In the interest of justice, we allow further 15 days time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to the respondents (applicants in MA) to comply with the directions passed in the Tribunals order dated 30.05.2011 in OA No.432/2011.

6. MA is accordingly disposed of.

7. Copy of this order may be issued to both the parties.

(Shailendra Pandey) Member (A) /nsnrsp/