The Post covers Limitation Rule CAT Tribunal Chandigarh Bench wherein the condonation of delay application dismissed as per rule.
Limitation Period
The literal meaning of the term ‘Limitation’ is a restriction or the rule or circumstances which are limited. In legal terms, there is a limit to filling a litigation and once should be vigilant enough to litigate within a specified time. If the litigation is filed after the expiry of the days mentioned, it will be barred from limitation and The Court might not accept the litigation. In India, The Limitation Act, came into force on 1963 and it prescribes a period in which one can file a suit. Supreme court in various judgments held that the limitation act is retrospective so far as they apply to all legal proceedings brought after their operations for enforcing causes of action accrued earlier. In this case study, the applicant filed an application in the Central Administrative Tribunal for the order dated way back in the year 1998.
Also Read- CAT Tribunal Chandigarh
Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 which talks about the Condonation of Delay which prescribes that the applicant has to satisfy the court in giving sufficient cause for appealing late or delay in appeal, and if the applicant is able to do that then the Court may accept his application and if not, the Court may reject the application as well. Here sufficient cause means, reasonable ground for which there was a delay in litigation in Court. Whether an applicant has given a sufficient cause or not depends upon the discretion of the court and the circumstances of each case. The litigant should act with sensible and reasonable diligence in prosecuting the appeal. Here, the Central Administrative Tribunal observed that there was no sufficient ground in the condonation of delay of the application that was filled for the order dated for the year 1998.
Also Read- Res Judicata in CAT Tribunal Chandigarh Cases
Birbal Kumar vs Union of India
Brief facts in the application
The applicant filed the application to question the order dated 23.12.1998 and 17.01.2019 where respondent have imposed punishment for serving the period between 07.08.1992 and 09.07.1997 as dies non (day on which no legal business can be done). The applicant along with the above application have filed a miscellaneous application in relation to condonation of filling the original application after 7335 days. The applicant in the defence of the delay in filing the original application cited the decision by Honourable Supreme Court in Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag and Another Vs. Mst. Katiji and Others, 1987 AIR 1353 in which it was held that the expression “sufficient cause” is adequately elastic to enable the Courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on merits. The applicant had filed a Review Application, which was not decided earlier, has now has been decided (order dated 17.01.2019) and thus, he has filed the original application.
Also Read- MACP CAT Tribunal Bench Case Legal Advice
Order by the Tribunal
The tribunal was of the opinion that the application is to be dismissed as there this huge delay can not be condoned and if the applicant had some problems with the order which was given in the year 1998 then he could have challenged it before the Court of Law. The original application which was filed after 21 years and such belated stage cannot be accepted. In the recent judgement by Honourable Supreme Court in Prahlad Raut Vs. AIIMS, 2020 (2) SLR 431, The Court held that making a representation will not extend limitation. The cause of action accrues on the date when the order is passed and the appeal/representation, provided under law, is disposed of. In case such order is not passed then the cause of action shall accrue on the expiry of six months from the date of filing of such appeal or representation.
The applicant instead of getting remedy from the Disciplinary Authority, the applicant chose to file a Review Application without there being any provision under the Rules. Therefore, the applicant is dismissed as it is time barred.
Also Read- HOUSE ACCOMODATION CASE CHANDIGARH CAT
For case specific advice, please contact Chandigarh Administrative Tribunal/Service Matter/Labour and Service/CAT/Legal Aid/Administrative/Senior/Service Employment Lawyers Advocates in Chandigarh Panchkula Mohali Kharar Derabassi Zirakpur etc.
More on 99888-17966.
