- (1.) Heard Sri S.K. Sharma, junior colleague of Sri M.M. Sharma, learned Counsel for the applicant as well as the counsel appearing for the Respondents and perused the records.
(2.) This review petition has been filed by the applicant, seeking review of an order passed by the Division Bench of this Court (Sushil Harkauli and G.P. Srivastava, JJ.) dated 6.11.2006.
(3.) The facts which are relevant for the purpose that an original application was filed by the applicant, challenging the order of termination dated 12.4.1996 on 17.11.1997, before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal rejected the original application on the ground of limitation, as it was filed after more than one year (i.e. the period prescribed for filing original application). Since the original application was not accompanied with the application for condonation of delay, therefore, on the law propounded by the Apex Court in the case of Ramesh Chand Sharma etc. v/s. Udham Singh Kamal and Ors. , 2000 (1)ATJ 178, the Tribunal found that in the absence of the written application, the delay can not be condoned.;