- (1.) INSTANT petition is directed against order of the Ld. Tribunal dt. 23/03/2004.
(2.) BRIEF facts of the case which are relevant for purpose of disposal of instant writ petition are that present petitioner initially joined service as Trains Clerk on 15/06/1981 and was promoted on the post of Sr. Trains Clerk in 1985, pursuant thereto his pay was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 1200 -2040. In May, 1988 he was further promoted to the post of Goods Guard in the pay scale of Rs. 1400 -2300. While he was working as Goods Guard, squint developed in his left eye and on account of which he was declared medically unfit and being decategorised was posted as Sr. TTE in August, 1994 and after having been absorbed on the post of Sr. TTE was fixed in the pay scale of Rs. 1200 -2040 and after fixation was made he was allowed to work for a sufficient long time and much after a decade made representation to the authority and prayed that he may not be fixed on being absorbed after medically unfit and decategorised and appointed as Sr. TTE in the pay scale 1400 -2300 and also claimed that certain allowance which is attached and permissible in terms of circular issued by the Railway Establishment from time to time, has also not been added to the salary/pay scale to which he was entitled for in terms of revised pay scale rules framed/issued from time to time. It would be appropriate to take note and quote the prayer which he made by filing OA before the Tribunal: - - "1) By an appropriate order or direction, the respondents be directed to fix the applicant in the pay scale of Rs. 1400 -2300 from the date of joining on the post of Goods Guard i.e. 12/05/1988. ii) An appropriate order or direction be issued to the respondents to make the correct fixation of the applicant particularly in the light of Para 1308 of Irem (Vol. I) from the date of absorption and the difference of Basic Pay, DA, CCA and HRA, arrears be also awarded to the applicant alongwith the interest @ 18% per annum from the date on which the arrear has become due till the date of payment including the difference of Travelling Allowance. iii) By an appropriate order the ancillary benefits which admissible to him and were attached with the post of respondents be directed to restore all Goods Guard as per para 1309 of item, Vol. I. iv) By and appropriate order or direction, the respondents be directed to award the pay scale of Rs. 5000 -8000 as per the decisions of the Railway Board dated 01/10/1999 in the light of the orders issued. v) By an appropriate order or direction, the respondents be directed not to call the applicant for Screening Test time and again as he has already faced Screening Test and also further cleared the examination on dated 21.03.1988 and further the letters issued calling upon the applicant to appear before the Screening Committee be quashed and set aside. vi) By an appropriate order or direction, the respondents be directed to assign the correct seniority to the applicant on the basis of length of service as Goods Guard in the category of Sr. TTE as per para 1310 of IREM, Vol. I."
(3.) THE respondents filed their reply and objection was raised that the original application has been filed after inordinate delay and barred by limitation Act u/S. 21 of the Administrative Tribunal Act 1985 and no such application seeking condonation of delay has been filed u/S. 5 of the Limitation Act and the OA being incompetent deserves dismissal, at the same time on merits the respondents are justified in their action regarding the pay scale of 1200 -2040 in which he was fixed on being absorbed on the post of Sr. TTE in August, 1994. The Ld. Tribunal after taking note of the material which came on record, was convinced that the preliminary objection raised by the respondents is valid and deserves acceptance and arrived to a conclusion that the OA has been filed after inordinate delay is barred by Limitation in view of Sec.21 of the Act, 1985 and failed to justify sufficient cause to entertain by the Ld. Tribunal and after taking note of the submissions on merits to some extent but without expressing opinion dismissed the OA holding it to be barred by limitation under order impugned dt. 23/03/2004.;