- (1.) The petitioner has challenged the order dated 2.12.2008 by which the petitioner was denied second financial up gradation under A.C.P. Scheme by preferring O.A. No. 279/2009 (R), obviously in the year 2009. The O.A. was dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Circuit Bench at Ranchi (in short-Tribunal) only on the ground that petitioner retired with effect from 1.1.2001 (by voluntary retirement) and he has moved the Tribunal only in the year 2005 and therefore, it is delayed matter and there is no reason to condone the delay, hence, dismissed the O.A.
(2.) It appears from the record that the Tribunal missed the relevant fact that petitioner applied for voluntary retirement on 18.9.2000 and his application for voluntary retirement was accepted vide order dated 9.12.2000, however, to be retired with effect from 31.12.2000. The petitioner's application for grant of A.C.P. was filed prior to his retirement and was directed to be considered again by the Tribunal in earlier round of litigation in O.A. No. 176/2005 by order dated 23.9.2008 after setting aside the order of rejection of the petitioner's application for grant of A.C.P. Therefore, in fact, the issue was raised by the petitioner by moving application on 12.12.2000 which was decided by the authority finally by the impugned order dated 2.12.2008. The time consumed was either in the High Court in writ petition or before the Tribunal and the Tribunal once directed the respondents to consider and decide the representation of the petitioner in the above facts and circumstances, is a continuation of the proceedings initiated by application dated 12.12.2000 by the writ petitioner before the respondent authorities and for which order was passed on 2.12.2008. The petitioner thereafter filed O.A. in the year 2009, therefore, the Tribunal was wrong in holding that the petitioner, after retirement with effect from 1.1.2001, has moved the application before the Tribunal only in the year 2005. This is factually wrong and the petitioner moved the application before the authority in time which was rejected in the year 2008 and the petitioner preferred O.A. within time and therefore, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal dated 17.8.2011 is set aside and the Tribunal is directed to decide the O.A. of the petitioner on merits.
(3.) The parties shall appear before the Tribunal in the month of July, 2012 when the Tribunal is functional.;