Original Application dismissed for want of prosecution following the applicant’s repeated failure to appear.

The seventy-five applicants, appearing as former casual laborers, filed an Original Application (OA) in 2016 seeking relief against the Railway Board and Northern Railway administration.

During the course of the proceedings, the applicants' legal representation became erratic.

On the hearing held on January 20, 2026, no representative appeared for the applicants.

The Tribunal noted the repeated absences and cautioned that the matter would be adjudicated in accordance with the law if the applicants failed to appear at the next listing.

At the subsequent hearing on March 19, 2026, the applicants again remained unrepresented, while the counsel for the respondents was present.

Whether the Original Application is liable to be dismissed due to the applicants' failure to appear and prosecute the matter.

The Tribunal applied the procedural doctrine of "dismissal for want of prosecution."

This principle, typically governed by Rule 15 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, empowers the Tribunal to dismiss an application if the applicant fails to appear when the matter is called for hearing.

The Tribunal analyzed the history of the proceedings, noting that the applicants’ representation had been "erratic" over several dates.

Despite the explicit warning issued during the previous hearing that the case would be adjudicated regardless of their presence, the applicants failed to appear and address arguments on the final date of listing.

The court reasoned that this persistent absence indicated a loss of interest on the part of the applicants to pursue the legal remedy sought in the OA.

Consequently, in the absence of the moving party, the Tribunal found no grounds to continue the proceedings.

It further ordered that all pending Miscellaneous Applications (MAs) stand disposed of and declared that there would be no order as to costs.