WP(C) 4113/2011 BEFORE HON BLE MR JUSTICE AMITAVA ROY HON’BLE MR JUSTICE P.K.MUSAHARY ( Amitava Roy,J) In challenge is the judgment and order dated 9.7.2010 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, Guwahati ( hereina fter referred to as the ’Tribunal’) rendered in O.A. No.154/2010 rejecting the petitioner challenge made therein principally on the ground of bar of limitation under the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 ( hereafter referred to as the ’Act ’). We have heard Mr M.Chanda, learned counsel for the petitioner an d Mr I.Hussain, learned Central Govt. Standing Counsel appearing for the respond ents. Briefly stated the facts are that, the petitioner was initial ly appointed as Lower Division Clerk in the establishment of the respondents an d was promoted as Accountant in the year 1974. Having regard to the hierarchy of posts, he was due for promotion to the rank of Selection Grade Divisional A ccountant on 1.7.1988 and the Divisional Accounts Officer on 1.7.91 . He has sin ce retired from service on superannuation on 31.7.2003. During his service tenur e though juniors to him had been promoted to the higher posts, he having been ov erlooked, he unsuccessfully submitted several representations. Eventually by ord er dated 21.6.2006 he was promoted to the post of Selection Grade Divisional Acc ountant with effect from 1.7.1988 and to the grade of Divisional Accounts Offic er with effect from 1.7.91 notionally and the resultant monetary benefits were computed with effect from 11.2.1995. His promotion to the next higher post of Sr . Divisional Accounts Officer however, did not materialize. It was eventually by the communication dated 18.6.09( Annexure-22 to the writ petition) that he was intimated that his candidature for promotion as Senior Divisional Accounts Off icer had been rejected in the Departmental Promotion Committee( for short ’DPC’ ) meeting dated 28.5.09 on the ground of not having been completely exonerated of the charge in a departmental proceeding against him. Being aggrieved, he approached the learned Tribunal challenging the decision con veyed by letter dated 18.6.2009 seeking a direction to the respondents to consi der him for promotion to the post of Senior Divisional Accounts Officer(Gr. B G azetted) with effect from 1.10.97 by holding a review DPC. He chose the date 1. 10.97 as, according to him, he was due for promotion to the said post on and fro m that date. The learned Tribunal noticing the relevant facts more particular ly that the petitioner’s juniors had been promoted to the post of Senior Divisi onal Accounts Officer on and from 26.3.2003, rejected the challenge on the groun d of delay. In recording this finding, the learned Tribunal also observed that the penalty imposed on the petitioner in the department proceeding had remain ed unchallenged and thus had attained finality. Mr Chanda has assiduously argued that as the petitioner for the first time had been intimated of the rejection of the candidature for promotion to the post of Senior Divisional Accounts Officer by communication dated 19.6. 2009, the original application filed on 21.6.2010 is well within the time presc ribed by law and therefore the rejection thereof on the ground of delay is pate ntly illegal. He has further argued that as on the date when his juniors had bee n promoted as Senior Divisional Accounts Officer, no disciplinary proceeding was pending against him, the reason for rejecting his candidature is non est. Mr Hussain has argued that not only on the ground of delay appar ent on the face of the record, the impugned judgment does not warrant any inte rference, as admittedly the petitioner has not questioned the legality and/or v alidity of the disciplinary proceeding drawn up against him and the penalty imp osed, he, in any view of the matter, is not entitled for promotion to the post involved and thus, the instant petition ought to be rejected in limine. We have considered the pleadings on record and the arguments adv anced. The materials on record disclose that the disciplinary proceeding as afor ementioned had been initiated against the petitioner vide O.M. No. 15.10.2001. There is no wrangle at the Bar that the departmental proceeding and the penalty imposed have remained unchallenged as on date. A penalty of 5% cut in pensi on for a period of three years has been imposed on him. In other words, the pet itioner has not been exonerated of the charge on which the departmental proceed ing had been initiated and conducted against him. It is the petitioner’s pleade d case that he had been promoted to the Grade of Divisional Accountant ( Select ion Grade) and Divisional Accounts Officer on 1.7.88 and 1.7.91 respectively. There were at points of time prior to the period involved in the disciplinary proceeding. Be that as it may, according to him, his juniors were promoted to the post of Senior Divisional Accounts Officer on 26.3.2003 and though he was d ue for promotion thereto with effect from 1.10.97, he was overlooked. Admitted ly though on the aforementioned date when his juniors were promoted , he was in service, he did not approach any judicial forum ventilating his grievance. Tho ugh it has been urged before us that the cause of action for the O.A. before the Tribunal arose only on 18.6.09, we are left unconvinced. The petitioner in th e attendant facts has been clearly negligent and guilty of laches to espouse h is cause. More importantly, after his juniors had been promoted to the said post on 26.3.2003, he chose to approach the learned Tribunal only on 21.6.2010 tha t is after seven years. As the petitioner cannot claim promotion as a matter of right and can insist only for consideration thereof, the penalty imposed o n him in the departmental proceeding if taken note of by the appointing authori ty to disqualify him for promotion, such a decision cannot per se be said to b e illegal or in arbitrary exercise of powers. In the above view of the matter, on the ground of delay as well as on merits, this petition according to us, does not merit consideration and it is therefore rejected. No costs.