RTI Responses and Subsequent Representations Do Not Extend the Prescribed Limitation Period for Challenging Non-Selection

The applicant applied for the post of Technician Gr-III under Employment Notice No. 09/2010 issued by RRB, Ajmer.

Following a written exam and document verification in August 2011, discrepancies were found: his name differed across documents (Sanjay Tirole vs. Sanjay Kumar Tirole) and his OBC certificate was in the State format rather than the Central Government format

The applicant claimed to have submitted corrective documents (an affidavit and a revised OBC certificate) in February 2013

After his result remained withheld, he filed an RTI in 2015, receiving a response on 17.08.2016 stating he was ineligible under Para-6.06 and 6.22 of the notice

He previously filed OA No. 1152/2016 before the Jabalpur Bench, which was withdrawn on 08.02.2018 with liberty to file before the appropriate forum

The present OA was filed in October 2018.

1. Whether the Original Application is barred by the limitation period prescribed under the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

2. Whether an information response provided under the RTI Act, 2005 constitutes a fresh cause of action/substantive order for the purpose of reckoning limitation

The court primarily applied Section 20 and Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. Section 20 mandates the exhaustion of internal remedies, stating that if no final order is passed on a representation, the remedy is deemed exhausted after six months

Section 21(1)(b) establishes a strict limitation period of one year from the date of such deemed exhaustion

The court also relied on the principle that the conditions of a recruitment notification are sacrosanct, and any violation renders a candidate unfit

The Tribunal found that the applicant's substantive grievance arose when his results were not declared following the 2010 notification. He submitted his first representation on 10.01.2015

Per Section 20(2)(b), the six-month period for a response ended on 10.07.2015, making the one-year limitation period for filing an OA expire on 10.07.2016

The court rejected the applicant's attempt to use the RTI response dated 17.08.2016 as a "cause of action," ruling that an RTI communication is merely information and not a substantive administrative order

Furthermore, the court noted that even after the Jabalpur Bench's order on 08.02.2018, the applicant waited over seven months to file the current OA without providing specific material dates to justify the delay

The court observed that subsequent representations or RTI queries do not legally extend the statutory limitation period

The court dismissed the Original Application and the associated Miscellaneous Application for condonation of delay solely on the ground of time-bar, without entering into the merits of the recruitment claims

No order as to costs was made