Full Text
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 18.11.2019
RITES LIMITED ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Vardhman Kaushik, Adv.
Through: Mr. Bhagwan Singh, Adv.
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI
JUDGMENT
The present petition is directed against order dated 29.04.2019 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (‘Tribunal’) by which delay in filing the O.A. has been condoned subject to payment of cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited with the Delhi Legal Services Authority.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an inordinate and unexplained delay of approximately five years; and moreover the O.A. is devoid of material particulars. The petitioner has strongly opposed condonation of the inordinate delay urging that 2019:DHC:6073-DB without recording any reasons, delay has been condoned in a mechanical manner.
3. Learned counsel for the respondent, on the other hand, submits that since cost of Rs. 5,000/- has been imposed, that is adequate recompense and there is no infirmity in the order of the Tribunal.
4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
5. In the case of P.K. Ramachandran vs. State of Kerala & Ors. AIR 1998 SC 2276, the Supreme Court has observed that at the outset while considering an application for condonation of delay, the court must record its satisfaction as to whether the explanation for delay is reasonable and satisfactory.
6. Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 reads as under:
7. However, the order of the Tribunal simply reads as under: “MA No. 653/2019 is filed seeking condonation of delay in filing the OA. Heard both the sides. The counter filed by the respondents in the MA vide diary NO. 3377 is taken on record. In the circumstances and in the interest of justice, delay in filing the OA is condoned, however, subject to payment of cost of Rs.5,000/- to the Delhi Legal Services Authority within three weeks. On payment of the same, list the OA under appropriate caption on 19.07.2019 for filing the counter by the respondents.”
8. On examining the order passed, we find that none of the averments of either of the parties have been noted nor any finding has been rendered as regards sufficiency of the explanation of the cause of the long delay in approaching the Tribunal.
9. Absent the recording of satisfaction, as mandated by the Supreme Court, the order of the Tribunal is set-aside.
10. We are informed that the next date of hearing fixed in the matter is 03.01.2020. The Tribunal will, in the first instance, decide the application seeking condonation of delay by passing a reasoned order, before proceeding any further in the matter.
11. The writ petition and the application stand disposed of in the above terms. G.S.SISTANI, J ANUP JAIRAM BHAMBHANI, J NOVEMBER 18, 2019