1 WP4238.11 Bsb IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 4238 OF 2011 1. The Union of India & ors. ... Petitioners v/s Shri Rajeev Kumar Meherwal ... Respondent Mr.A.D.Shetty i/by Naveen Kumari for the petitioners. Mr.G.K.Masand i/by Ajeet Manwani for the respondent. CORAM: A.M.KHANWILKAR & R. Y. GANOO, JJ. DATED: 8TH AUGUST, 2011 P.C.: 1. Heard counsel for the parties. 2. The Union of India has challenged the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 25.11.2010 in O.A. No. 380 of 2008. The Tribunal by the said judgment and order was pleased to quash the departmental enquiry instituted against the respondent on the ground that there was inordinate and unexplained delay. In para 8 of the judgment, the Tribunal has recorded finding of fact that the delay 2 WP4238.11 involved in issuing the charge-sheet and conducting the inquiry is inordinate and no justification has been given for the said delay. The counsel for the petitioners in all fairness submits that the reply affidavit filed on behalf of the petitioners before the Tribunal leaves much to be desired. He further submits that there was ample material on record in the office of the petitioners to justify the time spent between the year 2001 till 2005 and again from 2005 to 2008 when the charge-sheet was actually issued. Those details have been referred to in the petition filed before this Court for the first time. Suffice it to observe that the finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal cannot be faulted with. It is a different matter that the petitioners had legitimate explanation to offer but failed to do so in the proceedings before the Tribunal. The petitioners have placed on record the said explanation for the first time in this writ petition. Instead of going into the correctness thereof, in exercise of writ jurisdiction we would accede to the request of the petitioners to allow the petitioners to withdraw the petition with liberty to file a review petition before the Tribunal so as to place before the Tribunal the relevant explanation as also to indicate as to in what circumstances the said explanation could not be offered in the reply affidavit filed before the Tribunal. 3 WP4238.11 3. Accordingly, we dispose of this petition with liberty to the petitioners to take recourse to file a review petition before the Tribunal. All questions are kept open. 4. We make it clear that the question raised in the present petition are also left open to be considered at the appropriate stage. 5. The review petition be filed within two weeks from today. 6. Writ petition disposed of accordingly. ( R. Y. GANOO, J. ) (A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.) 4 WP4238.11