CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.16847 OF 2007 1. THE UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, DEPARTMENT OF POST, DAK BHAWAN, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, BIHAR CIRCLE, MAGHDOOR BUILDING, PATNA. 3. THE DIRECTOR, POSTAL SERVICES (HQ) O/O THE CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, BIHAR CIRCLE, PATNA. 4. THE DIRECTOR ACCOUNT OF POST, PATNA. 5. THE ADDITIONAL DIRECTOR GENERAL OF APS OF C/O 56, APO. 6. OFFICER INCHARGE, P & T ADMN. CELL KAMPTEE, APO, C/O- 56 APO. -------------------------------------Petitioners Versus J.P.MANDAL, SON OF LATE D.P. MANDAL OFFICER OF SUPERINTENDENT (HSG 1) O/O CHIEF POST MASTER GENERAL, BIHAR CIRCLE, PATNA, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KAHALGAON TOLA, P.O.- KHAWASPUR, DISTRICT- BHAGALPUR. ------------------------------------Respondents For The Petitioner :Mr Sanjay Kumar (CGC) For The Respondent :Mr. M.P. Dixit, Advocate. P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL S.K. Katriar, J & Kishore K. Mandal, J The Union of India and its functionaries have filed this writ petition against the following orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna: (i) order dated 3.8.2006(Annexure-1), passed in O.A. No. 437 of 2006 (J.P. Mandal versus The Union of India and others). (ii) order dated 9.8.2007(Annexure-2), passed in R.A. No. 25 of 2007 with M.A. No. 199 of 2007 (The Union of India & others versus Sri J.P. Mandal). 2. A brief statement of facts essential for the disposal of the present writ petition may be indicated. Respondent no.1 herein had preferred aforesaid O.A. no. 437 of 2006, inter alia, 2 for a direction to assign to him his due seniority, and to place him at the appropriate place in the gradation list. The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna, had passed order dated 25.11.2005, to direct the authorities below him to grant the requisite relief to the petitioner (Annexure-A). The relevant portion of the order dated 25.11.2005 is reproduced hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference: “Now, the aforesaid competent authority after careful examination of the whole case has been pleased to issue order of placement of Shri J.P. Mandal at appropriate place/position in gradation list issued on 01.07.1981 and approved his seniority as he was senior most S/T official of the circle office, which follows here under with consequential benefits flowing there from.” (emphasis added) The order of the Chief Postmaster General was not implemented. Consequently, he reiterated his direction by issuing office order no. 07, dated 28.4.2006 (Annexure-B). The entire context of the order is reproduced hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference: “Seniority of Shri J.P. Mandal, Office Supdt. of this office was fixed about six months back but it is a pity that the benefit of pay fixation has not been given to him so far and the Account Branch of this office is sitting right in the matter. The worst aspect of the situation is that even after my repeated telling the concerned Group Officer and the Dealing Asstt., there is no progress in the matter. Needless to say that this is a very serious matter and calls for disciplinary action against the above officer/official. I am giving the Branch Officer, Section Supervisor and Dealing Asstt. Yet another chance to finalize the pay fixation of Shri Mandal positively within 10 days failing which disciplinary action may please be initiated against all of them besides making adverse entry in their C.R. Asstt. Director (S & R) shall also associate himself in this exercise.” 3. On a consideration of the materials on record, the 3 Tribunal allowed the original application by the impugned order, paragraph nos. 3 and 4 of which are relevant in the present context, and are reproduced hereinbelow for the facility of quick reference: “3. At the outset, the counsel for the applicant submits that the Chief Postmaster General has already accorded two orders in favour of the applicant but the concerned respondent has not complied with the orders. He submits that a direction may be issued for compliance of the orders of the Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna. 4. The counsel for the respondents Shri Amresh Kumar Mishra submits that he has no objection if such a direction is issued.” (emphasis added) 4. It is relevant to state that the relevant orders of the Chief Postmaster General with consent of the parties had to be implemented. The Tribunal had by the said order dated 3.8.2006 (Annexure 1), with consent of the learned counsel for the Union of India, directed for implementation of the aforesaid two orders of the Chief Postmaster General. 5. We are informed at the Bar that the order has not till date been implemented. In such a situation, we emphasise paragraph 4 of the order of the Tribunal, whereby learned counsel for the department had agreed to the implementation of the two orders of the Chief Postmaster General. In such a situation, we find it inconceivable that the department can file the present writ petition. 6. Not content with the order of O.A. no. 437 of 2006, the department preferred the review application, which has been 4 rejected by the Tribunal mainly on the ground that it was hit by the bar of limitation, and there is no provision for condonation of delay in filing review application. The stand taken by the Tribunal is supported by the judgment of the Supreme Court in K. Ajit Babu and Others versus Union of India and others reported in 1997 SCC (L & S) 1520. Not content with the same, the department has preferred the present writ petition. 7. We are unable to see any cause of action for the Union of India to prefer the writ petition. By generating needless litigations including the present writ petition, the department has burdened the Tribunal as well as this Court with most unwanted matters, and has subjected a superannuated employee to harassment no end. This is a gross abuse of the process of the Court, and deserves the strongest condemnation. 8. This application is dismissed with costs quantified at Rs. 25,000/- (twenty five thousand), to be paid to the petitioner within a period of four weeks. . Patna High Court The 17th February, 2010 NAFR/pkj (S.K. Katriar, J.) ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )