Central Administrative Tribunal
Sunil Prakash vs INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING on 26 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 JODHPUR Order Sheet Item no.: 27 M.A./143/2026 (JODHPUR) [ FOR RESTORATION OF MA ] In Diary No.: 1384/2024 COMPASSIONATE APPOINTMENT With M.A./144/2026 FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 3 Order Dated: 26/10/2026 SUNIL PRAKASH Vs INFORMATION AND BROADCASTING
For Applicant(s) Advocate : Mr. Karan Singh Rathore, Advocate, present for the applicant For Respondent(s) Advocate : Order of The Tribunal The applicant has filed the instant M.A. for restoration of M.A. No. 63/2026 seeking restoration of the O.A., which was dismissed in default for non prosecution.
2. The facts of the case are as under : The father of the applicant, Sh. Omprakash Barasa, expired while in service on 12.05.2005. The wife of the deceased employee, on 29.09.2006, prayed for a compassionate appointment to her son, the applicant herein. Vide letter dated 11.02.2019 and thereafter, on 06.06.2022, the applicant was asked by the respondent authorities to complete some formalities. Thereafter, on 15.10.2024, the applicant filed O.A.
which remained under defects under Diary No.1384/2024, and was dismissed on account of failure to cure the defect(s) in terms of peremptory order passed on 03.12.2024.
3. Thereafter, the applicant filed M.A. No. 63/2026 along with condonation of delay application, to restore the O.A. but that M.A. was dismissed in default for non prosecution on 16.04.2026. The present M.A. No. 143/2026 along with M.A. No. 144/2026, seeking condonation of delay, has been filed seeking to restore the M.A. No. 63/2026. It is the contention of learned counsel for the applicant that he tried to appear through VC before the Tribunal on the date of listing, but failed to connect on account of network issues.
4. Having regard to the overall facts and circumstances of the case, we are not inclined to restore the M.A. seeking restoration of the O.A. which was dismissed on account of failure to cure the defects within the stipulated time. It is also pertinent to note that the applicant did not file M.A along with O.A. seeking condonation of delay. There was a long delay of about two decades in filing the O.A. seeking a compassionate appointment. The applicant has also failed to furnish sufficient reasons for not pursuing the matter on the fixed dates.
5. Considering the long delay in filing the O.A. seeking compassionate appointment, it would be a futile exercise to restore the same and to hear the matter on merits. As a result, the Misc. Applications No. 143 and 144/2026 are dismissed. HUKUM SINGH MEENA Member (A) Rameshwar Vyas Member (J) Jitendra Mehta
( pps )