SUNIL KUMAR MAHESHWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and made the following prayers in para 5 :

(2.) The Deputy Secretary (E), Railway Board asked the Principal, R.S.C., Vadodara to adjust all outstanding dues recoverable from the petitioner against the settlement dues (page 88 of this petition). The said order was communicated by Professor ? RM / Principal of Railway Staff College, Vadodara to the petitioner by letter dated 8.10.1999 whereby the petitioner was asked to remit the outstanding amount of House Building Advance taken from Railways by him to R.S.C. Neither the petitioner had preferred to challenge that order before the Tribunal within the period of limitation nor he had chosen to comply with the impugned order dated 8.7.1999 communicated to him by an order dated 8.10.1999. Instead he preferred to make a representation and continued to make representation after representation. Some of the representations remained un-replied. However, his last representation dated 9.9.2003 (page 113) and reminder dated 12.12.2003 came to be rejected by an order dated 4.2.2004. This impugned order dated 4.2.2004 (page 84) and the order dated 8.7.1999 came to be challenged by the petitioner by way of Original Application No.174 of 2004 before learned Tribunal which was dismissed by the learned Tribunal by its impugned judgment and order dated 30.8.2005 (Annexure-B to this petition) on the ground of limitation as well as on merits which is challenged in this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel Mr.Sinha for the petitioner vehemently submitted that the learned Tribunal erred in rejecting his application on the ground of limitation. He also tried to assail the impugned order passed by the learned Tribunal rejecting his application on merits. Having heard Mr.Sinha for petitioner for a considerable time on the ground of delay we were not convinced, therefore, we did not permit Mr.Sinha to assail the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal on merits as the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Tribunal was required to be confirmed on the ground of limitation.