Review Applications in Central Administrative Tribunal Dismissed when High Court upheld original order.

The captioned OAs (original applications) were decided by a common order/judgment dated 28.07.2025

The respondents in the OAs (the present petitioners in RA) initially approached the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh via various Writ Petitions, challenging the common order.

These petitions were dismissed on 12.11.2025 (e.g., WP No. 33502/2025 (O&M)) with liberty granted to the petitioners to approach the Tribunal by way of Review Application

Subsequently, the Review Applicants also approached the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi via different Writ Petitions, including WP No. 237/2026, to challenge the same common order/judgment of the Tribunal

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi dismissed these Writ Petitions by order/judgment dated 08.01.2026

The MAs for condonation of delay in filing the RAs were filed by the original respondents

The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi's order dated 08.01.2026 upheld the Tribunal's common order/judgment dated 28.07.2025, relying on an earlier judgment in W.P.(C) 15248/2022 titled Union of India & Ors. v. Sanjeev Kumar & Anr., against which an SLP was also dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on 16.12.2024

Whether the delay in filing the Review Applications (RAs) should be condoned

Whether the Review Applications, filed following liberty granted by the Punjab & Haryana High Court, should be dismissed given that the Tribunal's original order has been upheld by the Delhi High Court

The Tribunal applied the principle of condonation of delay in filing review applications when sufficient cause, such as bona fide administrative reasons and liberty granted by a higher court, is shown

Crucially, the Tribunal applied the principle of judicial finality and hierarchy, recognizing that once an order of its own (the common order dated 28.07.2025) has been explicitly upheld by a higher court (the Delhi High Court), a review application challenging the same order before the Tribunal becomes an abuse of process

This refers to the principle of res judicata or issue estoppel in a broader sense, where a matter already adjudicated and confirmed by a higher court cannot be re-litigated or reviewed by a lower forum concerning the same issue.

The Tribunal first addressed the MAs for condonation of delay.

It found that the delay in filing the RAs was due to the administrative processing following the liberty granted by the Punjab & Haryana High Court to file review applications, and thus the delay was neither willful nor deliberate, allowing for condonation based on bona fide administrative reasons

However, regarding the substance of the RAs, the Tribunal noted that the very common order/judgment (dated 28.07.2025) which was the subject of the RAs had subsequently been challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi and was unequivocally upheld by its order dated 08.01.2026

The Delhi High Court's decision specifically relied upon a controlling precedent (Union of India v. Sanjeev Kumar & Anr.) that had been affirmed by the Apex Court

Therefore, the Tribunal reasoned that attempting to review an order that a higher court had already affirmed constituted a misuse of the process of law

However, it dismissed the Review Applications themselves, finding them to be a misuse of the process of law because the underlying common order/judgment dated 28.07.2025, which the RAs sought to review, had already been upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi on 08.01.2026

The RAs were dismissed with easy costs