Central Administrative Tribunal
Vinay Kumar Dey vs BSNL on 8 October 2026
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PATNA Order Sheet Item no.: 23 M.A./504/2026 (RANCHI) [ RESTORATION ] In O.A./167/2026 SALARY Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 1 Order Dated: 08/10/2026 VINAY KUMAR DEY Vs BSNL
For Applicant(s) Advocate : Shri Mukesh Kumar Mehta.
For Respondent(s) Advocate : Prabhat Kumar Sinha. Order of The Tribunal Learned counsel for both the parties are present. M.A. 504/2026 has been filed by the applicant for restoration of O.A. No. 167/2026 wherein it has been prayed by the applicant that due to the mistake of the counsel, he could not appear in the court on 19.05.2026. There is no deliberate mistake of the applicant and for the mistake of the counsel, the applicant should not be penalised. There is no wilful default of applicant. Hence, the dismissal Order dated 19.05.2026 be quashed and O.A. be restored to its original position. In M.A. No. 505/2026 filed for condonation of delay, the applicant has further stated that since he was not present in Ranchi that is why he could not approach to the counsel for filing the restoration application as he managed to reach at Ranchi, he has filed the application with delay of 48 days. The applicant has good case on merit and the dismissal order was passed due to the latches of the counsel, hence, applicant has requested to condone the delay in filing the application. Counsel for the Opposite Parties has not disputed in allowing the application for condonation of delay. Heard the submissions of counsel for the applicant and perused the record. The grounds mentioned in M.A. No. 505/2026 are sufficient and also supported by uncontroverted affidavit. Hence, in the interest of justice, M.A. No. 505/2026 filed for condonation of delay is hereby allowed and delay in filing the O.A. is condoned. Heard on M.A. No. 504 of 2026. The grounds mentioned in M.A. No. 504/2026 for restoration of O.A. is sufficient and also supported by uncontroverted affidavit. Accordingly, dismissal Order dated 19.05.2026 passed in O.A. No. 167/2026 is hereby set aside and O.A. is restored to its original number. Counsel for the Opposite Parties has prayed for four weeks’ time to file W.S. He is directed to file W.S. within four weeks positively. List the O.A. on 11.12.2026. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA Member (A) Justice Narendra Kumar Johari Member (J) Binay Prasad ( ps )