- (1.) BY means of this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad on 8th July, 2014,, by which the Civil Misc. Application No. 330/00944 of 2014 filed in O.A. No. 13 of 2008 was rejected. The occasion to file the application for restoration of O.A. arose as a result of the order passed by the Tribunal which reads as under - "List revised. None appears for applicant. Shri P.N. Rai counsel for respondents is present. It appers that the applicant has lost interest in prosecuting the matter. O.A. Is accordingly dismissed in default and for non prosecution."
(2.) THE petitioner has urged several grounds for challenging the impugned order passed by the Tribunal and has also brought to our notice the order passed by the Tribunal on 7.1.2008 whereby the interim prayer of the petitioner was considered and following order was passed - " In the circumstances as mentioned above, we direct that the respondent No. 2 and 3 will permit the applicant to appear as a provisional candidate in the supplementary examination to be held on 11th January, 2008 for the post of Section Engineer/Drawing. The result of the applicant will not be declared without express orders of this Court and one vacancy will also be not filled uptill 24.1.2008."
(3.) IN compliance to the order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioner was permitted to participate in the examination. On the declaration of result, the petitioner failed in the examination, as such, the very nature of cause of action after declaration of result has clearly changed. From this point of view an effort was made to understand the cause of action set out in the O.A. wherein the following relief was sought by the petitioner in the O.A. - "i - Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order sending the list of 46 employees for promotional examination passed by Mahaprabandhak, Karmik, N.E. Railway Gorakhpur. ii - Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to send the name of the applicant in the list of employees for promotional examination fixed on 12.12.2007 and 19.12.2007 which is re -fixed on 11.1.2008. iii - Issue any other writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. iv. Award cost of the application to the applicant." From a perusal of the prayer, it is evident that the learned Tribunal by means of the interim order dated 7.1.2008 has substantially redressed the grievance of the petitioner. Once the petitioner participated in the examination for selection and did not succeed, the cause of action for which relief was sought lost its efficacy. The petitioner while filing the application for restoration has merely pointed out as to why he could not file an application for restoration within time, but in no part of the application for restoration, it is explained that the cause of action in respect to which petitioner had filed the O.A., survives wholly or in part.;