GPN-J-332-ARHCB-8_94-13,10,500-ALA4. SPL.H.C.A.S.C.D. 79e. FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 8822 OF 2004 PETITION NO. 8822 OF 2004 PETITION NO. 8822 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shri C.M.Jha for the petitioner Shri Sureshkumar for Respondent. CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G. PALSHIKAR & V.G. PALSHIKAR & V.G. PALSHIKAR & SMT. SMT. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. NISHITA MHATRE, JJ. DTAED; DTAED; DTAED; 7TH FEBRUARY, 2005 7TH FEBRUARY, 2005 7TH FEBRUARY, 2005. P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. The Original Application filed by the petitioner before the Central Administrative Tribunal was rejected on the ground that it is barred by limitation. The cause of action has accrued when the seniority of the petitioner was ignored for the first time. 2. Apart from this the petitioner did not file any application for condonation of delay before the Tribunal where he could have pointed out the reasons why the application could not be treated as barred by limitation. Having not chosen to contest on this ground, the petitioner now seeks to challenge the order before this court. Interfering at this stage with the order of the Tribunal when the Tribunal having attended other contentions now being raised, would be an error as the Tribunal has not committed any judicial error in deciding the matter on the materials placed before it. The petition therefore is rejected. ****