9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 1004X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... levant point of time. Contrarily, he cannot file a litigation seeking the very same benefit after several years, since the case filed by his colleague has attained finality. Such an attitude of a Government Servant cannot be encouraged by the Courts. An aggrieved person should approach the court of law within a reasonable period of time. Especially, the writ petitioner was working in the responsible post of Inspector of Central Excise. Thus, he is aware of the rules and regulations and as well as the service rights. Whenever his service conditions are affected he is at liberty to approach the competent forum for redressal. Contrarily, he cannot file a writ petition based on the orders passed in some other case with reference to the Origi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es a cause of action for the writ petitioner to file the present writ petition. The learned counsel is of an opinion that as per the memorandum issued, the petitioner is entitled for arrears of increment with effect from 01.02.1999 to 31.10.2001 and thereafter, his pension is revised with effect from 01.11.2001 by extending the benefit of the order dated 03.05.2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai in O.A.No.415 of 2005. 3. The petitioner was appointed as Lower Division Clerk in the Department of Central Excise and Customs during October, 1962. He was promoted as Upper Division Clerk in April, 1971 and thereafter, as Inspector of Central Excise in September 1974 and selection grade was granted. The petitioner retired ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... loyees will approach this Court after a lapse of many years seeking the similar relief. Thus, the said conduct of the writ petitioner in approaching the Court of law belatedly cannot be encouraged. 4. The present writ petition is filed by the writ petitioner at the age of 68 years after a lapse of 10 years from the date of retirement seeking the benefit of arrears of increment from 01.02.1999. Now, he would be around 74 years. Thus being the factum established, the writ petitioner undoubtedly slept over his right and therefore, he cannot wake up one fine morning and knock the doors of the Court for seeking remedy. Thus, this Court is not inclined to entertain the writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. No costs. - - Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
