IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) WEDNESDAY, THE SECOND DAY OF APRIL TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE SMT JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE S. ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO : 11436 of 1999 Between: P.Vinaya Kumar, S/o. Jagan Mohan Rao Patrudu, R/o. House of Kirla System, Upstairs, Velamapeta, Kaikaluru, Krishna District. ..... PETITIONER AND 1 Railway Recruitment Board, rep by its Chairman RRB, Secunderabad. 2 CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER, South Central Railway, Secunderabad. 3 Central Administrative Tribunal, Rep by its Registrar, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to issue any Writ, order or direction particularly a Writ in the nature of Mandamus declaring the impugned judgment dt.26.3.99 in O.A.No.1399/1998 of the 3rd respondent as illegal, arbitrary, and consequently direct the respondent 1 & 2 to appoint the petitioner to the post of senior scientific Research Assistant (Psychology)- category No.5 (Employment Notification No.1/95) in pursuance of the selection communicated under proceedings dt.30.9.1995 and to pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit just and necessary in the circumstances of the case Counsel for the Petitioner: DR.P.B.VIJAY KUMAR Counsel for the Respondents.: MR.R.S.MURTHY The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI. JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO :11436 of 1999 ORDER: (Per the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking to set aside the order passed in O.A.No:1399 OF 1998 on 26.3.1999 by the Central Administrative Tribunal and to direct respondents-1 and 2 to appoint the petitioner to the post of Senior Scientific Research Assistant (Psychology) –Category No:5 in pursuance of the selection communicated under proceedings dated 30.9.1995. The petitioner herein is the applicant, who has filed the present O.A on the ground that he appeared for written examination on 30.7.1995 and thereafter, he was called for oral interview on 28.9.1995 and vide proceedings dated 30.9.1995, he was informed by the 1st respondent that his name has been recommended to the 2nd respondent, who in due course would offer the appointment to him and that the applicant waited for three months, but he did not receive any communication either from the 1st respondent or from the 2nd respondent inspite of the periodical approaches to the 2nd respondent and inspite of the representations dated 25.1.1996 and 19.5.1996 addressed to the General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and further representation dated 20.9.1996 and telegram dated 18.2.1997 addressed to the 2nd respondent and the telegram dated 22.4.1998 to the Ministry of Railways. The tribunal having observed that the O.A suffers from the bar of limitation and the cause of action, if any starts running from 25.1.1996 when he made a representation to the respondents for non receipt of appointment letter and he could have lawfully waited for six months from 25.1.1996, but should have filed the O.A before the expiry of one year from the completion of six months from 25.1.1996, which would mean that the applicant should have filed the O.A on or before 25.7.1997 and instead, the O.A was filed on 15.10.1998, which is hopelessly time barred and apart from that, the applicant failed to make out any case for admission, dismissed the O.A at the admission stage. Having aggrieved by the same, the present writ petition is preferred by the applicant. Heard the learned counsel and perused the entire material available on record as well as the order impugned. The order impugned goes to show that O.A has been rejected on the ground that the applicant has failed to make out any case for admission as well as on the ground of limitation. It is seen from the order impugned that the Railway Recruitment Board, Secunderabad had formed a panel dated 28.9.1995 which included the name of the applicant for appointment to the post of the Senior Scientific Research Assistant in the pay scale of Rs.1640-2900 and that the Railway Board vide proceedings No:E (NG)II/92/PB/RDSO/I, dated 23.8.1995 decided that no additional non gazetted post in Psycho technical cadre need be sanctioned on the railways and held that the instructions contained in the letter dated 8.4.1993 and 30.3.1994 were to be kept in abeyance and it was further decided that the work should be managed by nominating adequate number of traffic/electrical/mechanical Inspectors from the existing sanctions under CCS to form a cell on each Railway to assist in Psycho testing and therefore, there is no alternative except to deny the appointment. It is not the case of the applicant that appointments, if any have been given without considering his case. Apart from that, the approach of the applicant before the tribunal is also at a belated stage, which itself is sufficient to reject the claim of the applicant as rightly observed by the tribunal. In view of these circumstances, We feel that the tribunal is justified in rejecting the claim of the applicant. Hence, We see no merits in this writ petition and as such, the same is liable to be dismissed. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. No costs. _______________________ Justice T.Meena Kumari ______________________ Justice S.Ashok Kumar Dated:02.04.2008 Gurc/nn THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE T.MEENA KUMARI & THE HON'BLE SRI. JUSTICE S.ASHOK KUMAR WRIT PETITION NO :11436 of 1999 (Division Bench Order delivered by the Honourable Smt. Justice T.Meena Kumari) 02/04/2008