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.
Civil Petition No.228-R of 1984, decided on 22nd October, 1984.
(From the judgment, dated 19-5-1984 of the Federal Service Tribunal, passed in Appeal No.199(R) of 1982).
---Art.212--Determination of seniority of civil servant--Leave to appeal--Appeal of petitioner before Service Tribunal dismissed as time- barred as same had not been filed within period of limitation from making representation--Contention that period of limitation be counted from letter of the Department which was neither a final order nor appeal able --Tribunal, held, justified in dismissing appeal as time-barred in circumstances and no case of interference by Supreme Court was made out--Since a final determination of seniority of petitioner was yet to be made by department, petitioner would, therefore, be entitled to press for such determination notwithstanding view taken by Tribunal- Petition for leave to appeal dismissed.--[Civil service].
Petitioner in person.
Nemo for Respondents.
Date of hearing: 22nd October, 1984.
The petitioner had been appointed as Assistant with effect from 13-11-1972 in the Ministry of Production. He was transferred to the Ministry of Religious Affairs in the same post with effect from 15-1)-1976. In the seniority list of Assistants in the latter Ministry issued on 5-6-1980, he was assigned seniority from that date, i.e., 15-11-1976. He made a representation against it on 16-6-1980 claiming seniority from 13-11-1972. By letter, dated 14-7-1982 he was informed by the Ministry that "the case of his seniority is, however, being determined in consultation with the Establishment Division. The decision taken in the matter will be communicated to him in due course". He, thereupon, filed an appeal before the Federal Service Tribunal on 25-11-1982, which was dismissed by the impugned order, dated 19-5-1984 on the ground of limitation, as also on merits.
2. The appeal of the petitioner was obviously time-barred as h had not filed the same within the period of limitation from making the representation. The petitioner, who personally argued the case before us, referred to the letter of the Ministry, dated 14-7-1982 to urge that limitation was to count from that date. But that letter, not being final order, was not appeal able. The Tribunal was, therefore, justifies in dismissing the appeal as time-.barred, and as such no case is made out for interference in that regard. However, since a final determination of his seniority is yet to be made by the Ministry, he would be entitled to press for such determination notwithstanding the view taken by the Tribunal. With this observation the petition is dismissed.
M . Z . M . Petition dismissed.
Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.
🔍 Find a Lawyer