Pleading at h & p high court in railway establishment and servicr law
satish kumar
(Querist) 25 January 2015
This query is : Resolved
Pl suggest me senior & best service matter lawyer(Railway) to file a case in Punjab & Hariyana High court
OA 1025/PB/2013 filed by the applicant is dismissed on the ground that the OA is filed almost 23 yrs belated stage although the respondents apoointed in nov 1991 do not fulfill the eligibility criteria. legal notice was sent to the respondents in nov 2012 and 1&1/2 yrs relaxation was given by tribunal, in spite of this the CAT chd dismissed the OA after two years of pleading.
Isaac Gabriel
(Expert) 26 January 2015
You have not given the facts of the case.
satish kumar
(Querist) 27 January 2015
Brief of proceedings of the case OA 1025/PB/2013 in CAT:
1. Legal notice dated 18.11.2012 was sent to secretary, railway board, new delhi and to GM & GM(P), RCF, Kapurthala by the counsel for applicant Sh. Arun Singla against the order of promotion to the post of AEDPM (B group) of three candidates dated 17.07.2010 passed by GM(P) and were earlier appointed in Nov. 1991 to the post of AP & DPS without fulfilling the eligibility criteria (without PGDCA computer degree) and not giving chance for promotion to the genuine candidates who appointed with completely fulfilling the eligibility criteria although the eligibility criteria was remain the same throughout the recruitment years 1988 to dec. 1998 except in experience. Not only the three candidates but others also appointed without computer degree. The post AP & DPS was merged as Sr. Engr./IT after implementation of 6th pay commission. Reply time was given within 1.5months to GM(P).
2. After end of 1.5 months, the counsel for the applicant filed a case in CAT, Chandigarh with OA no. 243/PB/2013 in the 3rd Feb, 2013 before the reply of the legal notice by GM(P) dated 06.02.2013.
3. Order dated 01.03.2013 passed by the Hon’ble Tribunal to give the reply of the legal Notice by the GM(P) to the Hon’ble Tribunal in which the GM(P) rejected the claim of the counsel of the applicant.
4. The reply of the order dated 01.03.2013 was given by the GM(P) on dated 31.05.2013.
5. Against the order dated 31.05.2013 of GM(P), the counsel for applicant filed a case in the CAT, Chandigarh with OA 1025/PB/2013 in june, 2013.
6. The counsel of the applicant demanded from the Hon’ble Tribunal to give reply of the OA 1025/PB/2013 by the counsel for respondents.
7. A written statement was filed by the counsel for respondents as reply to the OA 1025/PB/2013.
8. Replication on dated 14Feb, 2014 was filed by the counsel for applicant as a response to the written statement of the counsel for respondents in the Tribunal.
9. On hearing dated 15.10.2014 and on objection of the counsel for respondents, the Hon’ble members order the counsel for applicant to make party of the concerned persons for further proceeding of case.
10. On hearing dated 20.10.2014, the Hon’ble members ordered not make party of the concerned persons but to file an affidavit on the basis of order dated 20.10.2014 that the following candidates have not possessing the required qualification for appointment to the said post.
11. The reply of the order dated 20.10.2014 was submitted by the applicant and the affidavit will be submitted after arguing on the said order. The Hon’ble members told the counsel for applicant first to file an affidavit.
12. On dated 01.12.2014, the affidavit as well as reply of the order dated 20.10.2014 was submitted by the counsel of the applicant to challenge the appointment, seniority and promotion of the candidates of the respondents.
13. On hearing dated 04.12.2014, Hon’ble members asked client verbally to bring his educational certificates on next hearing date 23.12.2014.
14. On hearing dated 23.12.2014, argue was made in Hon’ble Tribunal by the counsel for applicant. The Hon’ble members did not asked the client to show his educational certificates although the client along with file of his educational certificates was standing with his counsel before the Hon’ble members to show his certificates.
15. Without pronouncement of decision date, the Hon’ble members sent judgment to the counsel for applicant.
pl send me the reply after reading the case mentioned above.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 07 May 2015
repeated
http://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/time-limitation-of-service-after-which-one-can-t-challenge-its-appointment-seniority-promotion--521746.asp
