USHA vs DSSSB & ANR.

Judgment text excerpt

$~77 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P.(C) 2589/2025 & CM APPL. 12307/2025 USHA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. S.N. Sharma, Adv. versus DSSSB & ANR. .....Respondents Through: Mrs. Avnish Ahlawat, Standing Counsel with Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms. Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL JUDGMENT (ORAL) % 03.03.2025 C.HARI SHANKAR, J. 1. This writ petition is directed against an order dated 11 September 2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal1, whereby the Tribunal has refused to condone the delay of 620 days in filing the OA 845/2024 and has therefore dismissed the OA on the ground of delay. 2. Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, permits an OA to be filed within one year of the arising of the cause of action. 1 “the Tribunal”, hereinafter W.P.(C) 2589/2025 Signature Not Verified Page 1 of 4 Signed By:MEENU KALRA Signing Date:05.03.2025 17:15:42 3. The result of the examination with which the petitioner was aggrieved was declared on 9 April 2019. The petitioner’s grievance is that she had not been short-listed for the post of Educational and Vocational Guidance Counsellor A (EVGC) for which the selection was held. 4. Reckoned from 9 April 2019, one year would elapse on 8 April 2020. The OA came to be filed on 19 February 2024. 5. Mr. S.N. Sharma, learned Counsel for the petitioner, submits that, by 8 April 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic had struck and, therefore, the petitioner would be entitled to the benefit of extension of the period of limitation during the currency of the pandemic applying the orders passed by the Supreme Court in Cognizance for Extension of Limitation, In re2 6. Even reckoned on that count, the amnesty available t