Lawyers Directory Listing
Chat with us free on WhatsApp — tell us your city and legal matter and our team connects you with the right lawyer. No form, no fee.
Appeal No. 60/364 of 1978, decided on 6th January, 1980.
‑‑ S. 4‑Seniority list published in 1973‑Position reiterated in list published in 1977‑Seniority position challenged in 1978‑Limita tion, held, to be reckoned from previous seniority list‑No departmental representation found to have been made‑Appeal, in circumstances, dismissed as time barred.
Idrees Khan's case P L J 1973 Tr. C. 73 ( ) ref.
In this case the appellant, Headmaster in the Education Department, seeks to set aside the seniority assigned to respondents 3 and 4. It is stated that the first seniority list was published on 16th August, 1971 in which the appellant was shown senior which was represented against by res pondent No. 2 whose seniority was brought on Serial No. 21 and the appellant was relegated to Serial No. 31. The corrected seniority list was published on 13th September, 1973, a copy of which is said to have been sent to all concerned Headmasters of the District. The appellant claimed to have made representation but he has neither produced any satisfactory evidence in this regard nor the Directorate of Education Department admitted the receipt of the same. The latest seniority was published on 1st January, 1977 in which the appellant was again shown as junior to Respondents 3 and 4 and the appellant has come up now before us in appeal against the same.
2. The respondent has raised the objection that the appeal is barred by time inasmuch as the appellant seeks to set aside the seniority position as reflected: and circulated vide seniority list dated 13th September, 1973. The appellant relies in this behalf on the decision of this Tribunal in Idrees Khan's case (P L J 1973 Tr. C 73 ( )). The learned counsel for the respondent further submitted that he has not filed any representation and thus the appeal was barred by time.
3. After hearing both the parties we are inclined to uphold the objection raised by the respondent. The appellant has failed to produce any satisfactory evidence that he made any representation. None was available on the record of the Department either. The appeal is not accompanied by any application for the condonation of delay. The same is accordingly, dismissed as barred by time.
Appeal dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer