JUDGMENT The petitioner has assailed the order dated 10 March 2016, passed by the State Public Service Tribunal in Claim Petition No.1412 of 2014. The learned Tribunal has rejected the petitioner's claim being barred by time. 2. The petitioner, while he was posted as Junior Clerk, was awarded an adverse remarks in his annual character roll on 11 March 2010. Aggrieved petitioner had submitted representation before the Joint Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Mainpuri Sambhag, Firozabad on 19 May 2010, which was rejected on 31 March 2011. Aggrieved petitioner instead challenging the order passed on the representation choose to submit another representation to the Additional Commissioner, Commercial Tax, Itawah Zone, Etawah on 30 April 2011, who too rejected the same on 21 July 2012, on the ground that it was not maintainable under the provisions of U.P. Government Servant (Disposal of Representation against adverse Annual Confidential Report and allied matter) Rules, 1995. Aggrieved petitioner challenged the said order before the Tribunal. The Tribunal had considered the whole aspect of the matter and found that the claim petition filed by the petitioner was barred by limitation. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the limitation for filing the claim petition should be counted from the date of order passed on 21 July 2012, but the learned Tribunal enumerated the time of limitation from the date of first order passed on 31 March 2011 rejecting his representation. 4. In view of the aforesaid submissions, we have examined the order passed by the learned Tribunal. We found that the learned Tribunal has recorded a finding that once the second representation was not maintainable in the eye of law the same could not give a fresh cause of action in the matter, accordingly the original cause of action has to be looked into for the purpose of consideration of limitation from the date of order passed on 31 March 2011. Rejecting the petitioner's representation the learned Tribunal has given this finding in the light of the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttaranchal & others Vs. Sri Shiv Charan Singh Bhandary & others (2014 (1) LBESR 141 (SC) and in C.Jacob Vs. Director of Geology and Mining & Anr. (2008) 10 SCC 115 . 5. Rejecting the petitioner's representation the learned Tribunal has given this finding in the light of the order passed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttaranchal & others Vs. Sri Shiv Charan Singh Bhandary & others (2014 (1) LBESR 141 (SC) and in C.Jacob Vs. Director of Geology and Mining & Anr. (2008) 10 SCC 115 . 5. After giving thoughtful consideration on the matter we arrived at conclusion that the learned Tribunal has rightly held that the claim petition was barred by limitation. Thus, we do not find error in the order impugned. In the result the writ petition stands dismissed.