SHRI. ARUN RAMCHANDRA CHAVAN v. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH PRINCIPAL SECRETARY AND ORS.
Discusses principles of limitation, the effect of representations on limitation, and grounds for review.
Court: Bombay High Court
Citation: 2025:BHC-AS:25577-DB
Decision Date: 26-06-2025
List of Laws
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985; General Principles of Law
- Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985: The judgment discusses the limitation provisions under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The respondents argued that the petitioner's repeated representations were insufficient to overcome the limitation period prescribed by the Act. The court agreed, noting that the petitioner should have approached the Tribunal within the prescribed limitation period after the initial rejection of his representation. The court stated that making repeated representations does not extend the period of limitation, especially in service matters, where prompt action is expected.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment addresses the principle of limitation, specifically in the context of approaching a court or tribunal. It emphasizes that repeated representations do not extend the limitation period. The court highlights the importance of approaching the appropriate forum with "utmost dispatch" or within the prescribed limitation period. The judgment also touches upon the concept of "error apparent on the face of the record" as grounds for review, but ultimately finds no such error in the original order.
🔒 For Members Only