% 25-03-2009 35# Present: Mr. Himanshu Gupta, Advocate for the advocate. Mr, R.V. Sinha with Mr. A.S. Singh, Advocate for the respondent. + CM Appl. No. 4015/2009(exemption) Exemption is allowed, subject to just exceptions. W.P.fC) No. 7761/2009 1^ The petitioner was consideredfor promotion to Grade-I by the ^ DPC convenedin the year 2001,butwas not recommendedfor promotion as he was declared'unfit'. Exceptmakingrepresentation,thepetitionerdid not take his casefurther by filingany legalproceedings. He alsoretired on ^ 31.08.2008. Only after his retirement,he filed OA No. 2497/2008 in November,2008 alleging that he was not properlyconsideredby the DPC. Submissionin this behalfwas that thoughhe was given'Good' gradingin his ACR for therelevantyearsand the benchmarkfor promotionwas 'Very Good',he was not communicatedaboutthe said ACRs and reliedupon the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Dev Dutt Vs. Union of Inida & Others^ (2008) 8 SCC 725. We find from the judgmentof the Tribunalthat OA is dismissedas time barred. This is rightlyso as it was Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Certify that the digital file and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified %- not open to the petitioner to rake up the issue belatedly. A subsequent judgment of a Court declaring a particular law would not save the limitation for the petitioner. The Tribunal has recorded that the petitioner was considered for promotion on five occasions, but was not found fit. He never protested. In the year 2008, he was selected for promotion to Grade- II of IPS and was empanelled. However, before he could get fruits of the said empanelment, he retired. It is very clear from the above that the above OA was rightly dismissed by the Tribunal as time barred. Hence, we do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is accordingly dismissed. a^ctsikrijT SURESH KAIT, J. March 25, 2009 pmc