IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH MAY 2011 / 6TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 36797 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- SANDHYADEVI.P.U.,(LOWER DIVISION CLERK) DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (KERALA & LAKSHAWEEP) ERNAKULAM, 5TH FLOOR, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI 682036. BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.NARENDRAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES (BANKING DIVISION)JEEVAN DEEP, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI 110001. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES, SAROJINI HOUSE, 6, BHAGAWAN DAS ROAD NEW DELHI 110001. 3. THE DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (KERALA & LAKSHADWEEP ) ERNAKULAM, 5TH FLOOR, KSHB BOARD BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI 682 036, REP. BY ITS REGISTRAR. 4. SMT.BINDHU.K.B NOW WORKING AS UPPER DIVISION CLERK DEBTS RECOVERY TRIBUNAL (KERALA & LAKSHADWEEP ) 5TH FLOOR, KSHB BOARD BUILDING, PANAMPILLY NAGAR, KOCHI 682 036, SHRI.GEORGE ZACHARIA, CGC FOR R1 to R3 SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 27/05/2011. ON THE SAME DAY THE COURT DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 36797 of 2008(E) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE OFFICE ORDER DATED 27.06.2003 ISSUED BY THE 3rd RESPONDENT P2. COPY OF THE DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL & TRAINING O.M. NO:36035/3/2004 - ESST. (RES) DATED 29.12.2005 P3. COPY OF DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL & TRAINING OM NO:36035/8/2003-ESST. (RES.) DATED 26.04.2006 P4. COPY OF PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 25.05.2007 BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. P5. COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 14.06.2007 OF THE 3rd RESPONDENT. P6. COPY OF PETITIONER'S REPRESENTATION DATED 18.06.2007 BEFORE THE 3rd RESPONDENT P7. COPY OF PETITION'S REPRESENTATION DATED 21.06.2007 BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT. P8. COPY OF PETITIONER'S COMPLAINT DATED 01.08.2007 BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT. P9. COPY OF PETITION'S 3rd RESPONDENT'S REPLY DATED 25.09.2007 TO EXHIBIT P8 COMPLAINT. P10. COPY OF PETITIONER'S REJOINDER DATED 01.10.2007 TO EXHIBIT P9. P11. COPY OF RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 14.02.2008 OF THE 2nd RESPONDENT. P12. COPY OF THE 3rd RESPONDENT'S REPORT DATED 22.04.2008 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 2nd RESPONDENT. P13. COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S REJOINDER DATED 29.04.2008 TO EXHIBIT P12 REPORT P14. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 21.05.2008 OF THE 2nd RESPONDENT ON EXHIBIT P8 COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT PROMOTING THE PETITIONER,DATED 04.05.2009 // TRUE COPY // PA TO JUDGE kkj S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C)No.36797 of 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 27th day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T It is not disputed by the petitioner now, that a writ petition is not maintainable before this Court insofar as the remedy of the petitioner is to file an original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal. In fact in an identical case, it has been held so by a Learned Judge of this Court in WP(C) No.35640/2008. But the learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was totally unaware of this fact, since, despite filing a counter affidavit, to the writ petition filed on 12.12.2008, the 4th respondent has not raised such a contention. None of the respondents has raised such a contention. According to him, the judgment was also brought to the notice of the petitioner only during the last posting date. The petitioner, therefore, submits that although the petitioner has to be relegated to the remedy before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner may be permitted to seek condonation of delay for the period during which the writ petition was pending before this Court, insofar as a period of limitation is prescribed under the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, W.P.(C)No.36797 of 2008 2 for approaching the Tribunal. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I dismiss this writ petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal under the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985. I am sure that, in view of the circumstances stated above the Central Administrative Tribunal would certainly take into account the said circumstances for deciding the question of condonation of delay, if the petitioner files an O.A with a petition for condonation of delay in filing the same stating the above facts. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE kkj