Satish v. Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh And Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CWP No.2007 of 2023 (O&M) Date of Decision: 02.02.2023 SATISH .......Petitioner V/s.

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH, CHANDIGARH THROUGH ITS REGISTRAR AND OTHERS ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO. HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SUKHVINDER KAUR.

Present:

Mr. Surender Lamba, Advocate, for the petitioner.

**** M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO, J. (Oral) The petitioner in this Writ Petition has challenged the order dt.13.02.2020 (Annexure P-1) passed by respondent No.1-Central Administration Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred as "the Tribunal") .

Notice of motion.

Mr. P.C. Goyal, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondents No.2 to 5.

Heard.

It is contended by the petitioner that his counsel has not informed him about the dismissal of his OA by the Tribunal, and he came to know of it only on 18.01.2022, when he contacted his counsel in the Tribunal.

In our opinion, it is the duty of the party to find out the status of his case/OA, and blaming the counsel for not informing about the result of his case/OA, is not proper.

SURESH KUMAR 2023.02.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

CWP No.2007 of 2023 (O&M) It is the further contention of the petitioner that after the petitioner came to know the fate of his OA, his counsel had advised him to file a review-application, and had also obtained his signatures on the relevant documents, but he neither filed the Review Application nor informed him.

He contended that on 25.12.2022, the petitioner has obtained all documents from the previous counsel, and engaged the present counsel to file this Writ Petition.

We are of the considered opinion that it is the duty of the party to pursue his case and ensure that the proceedings of his case are taken up and pursued by his counsel. If the petitioner came to know about the status of his OA on 18.01.2022, we fail to understand why the petitioner has kept mum for more than one year. Hence, this Writ Petition is barred by delay and latches.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is dismissed in limine on the ground of delay and latches. (M.S. RAMACHANDRA RAO) JUDGE (SUKHVINDER KAUR) JUDGE February 2, 2023 Ess Kay Whether speaking / reasoned :

Yes /No.

Whether Reportable :

Yes/No SURESH KUMAR 2023.02.08 14:19 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document