The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) had rejected the Review Application (RA) of UT Chandigarh filed through its...

CHANDIGARH: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) had rejected the Review Application (RA) of UT Chandigarh filed through its Senior Superintendent of Police (Traffic and Security) seeking extension of time period of four months as granted earlier by CAT on March 6, 2018 for concluding the departmental proceedings initiated against Chandigarh Police’s Inspector Dilsher Singh  by way of  issuing charge sheet to him on January 30, 2018.

The said charge sheet was assailed by him by way of filing  Original Application  (OA) in the CAT Chandigarh Bench on various grounds including that of malafide and biased against the then IG/DGP Chandigarh Tajinder Singh Luthra. On March 6, 2018 the CAT disposed of the OA with a direction to the competent authority to complete the departmental enquiry initiated against Dilsher Singh in pursuance to the impugned charge sheet issued on January 30, 2018, in all respect, within a period of four months, failing which the operation of the charge sheet would be deemed to have been stayed for all intents and purposes. 

However, the UT could not conclude the Inquiry within the stipulated time frame and accordingly the Inquiry was deemed to be stayed for all intents and purposes. Faced with the situation, UT Chandigarh preferred a Review Petition with a delay of 117 days, before the CAT for recalling of the judgment dated March 6, 2018 sought extension in the time frame of four months granted by CAT to conclude the departmental Inquiry against Dilsher Singh on the ground that the time as stipulated escaped the notice of the authority.

The counsel for Dilsher Singh argued that the Review Petition preferred by the UT Chandigarh, is not maintainable as no  ground much less cogent one to review the order has been putforth and, in fact, in the guise of review plea, the UT Administration is virtually seeking extension of time for compliance of the judgment passed by CAT on March 6, 2018 and that too after the expiry of the time frame of four months from the passing of the judgment.

Holding that in the Review Application, the UT Administration has not been able to bring on record any error, much less, apparent on face of record and further observing that the time frame of four months escaped their notice is too far fetched and cannot be accepted; the Bench headed by Mr. Sanjeev Kaushik, Member (J), declined the Review Petition preferred by the UT Administration.