Writ petition challenging CAT order on railway promotion was disposed of as infructuous because the respondent had retired.
Writ petition disposed of recording that the order is infructuous due to retirement.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON &
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MAY 2016/6TH JYAISHTA, 1938
WP(C).No. 7219 of 2009 (Z)
AGAINST THE ORDER IN OA 490/2007 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 20-06-2008
PETITIONER(S):
BY ADVS.SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS SRI.JAMES KURIAN, SC, RAILWAYS
RESPONDENT(S):
P.R.GANGADHARAN SENIOR TECHNICIAN IN RAILWAY (RETIRED), RESIDING AT PUTHENPURA HOUSE, KINAVALLUR POST, PARLI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.
R,R BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY R,R BY ADV. SRI.G.SHYAM RAJ R,R BY ADV. SRIT.R.MOHANAKUMAR
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 2705-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 7219 of 2009 (Z)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF O.A. NO. 490/2007 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES OF CAT/ERNAKULAM EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A. NO. 490/2007 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES. EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF REJOINDER IN O.A. NO. 490/2007 OF CAT/ERNAKULAM EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF ADDL. REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A. NO. 490/2007 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES EXT. P5 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 20.06.2008 OF CAT / ERNAKULAM IN O.A. NO. 490/2007
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON
&
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JJ.
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
This Writ Petition is filed by the respondents in O.A. No. 424 of 2007 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench challenging Ext. P5 order passed by the Tribunal.
W.P.(C) No. 7219 of 2009
: 2 :
with effect from the date of such promotion of those who are included in Annexure A8 with all the consequential benefits.
“14. In view of the above, we are of the considered opinion, that the respondents cannot be faulted for conducting the common examination in respect of Junior Engineer Gr. II in Palghat Division. Rather, it is to be treated as the applicant having been given a chance for promotion to the general cadre of Junior Engineer Gr. II. At the same time we are equally of the considered view that since there is a separate wing for AC, apart from the general chance given to the applicant, if vacancies arise in the Wing in the Trivandrum Division, as hitherto for, he should be permitted to participate in the examination conducted for the same. Otherwise it would amount to the applicant being sent to the general wing without obtaining his option. Respondents should therefore keep in view that when no separate sanctioned post of Junior Engineer Gr. II exists in Palghat Division, Technicians of AC Wing posted in Palghat Division should be considered as belonging
W.P.(C) No. 7219 of 2009
: 3 :
to Trivandrum as in the post for the limited purpose of participation in the selection under the 25% quota for the post of Junior Engineer Gr. II (AC). Any post of Junior Engineer (AC) at Palghat Division should be treated as a part of Trivandrum Division staff. Henceforth he not considered for selection of Junior Engineer conducted by Palghat Division. This is subject to the condition that in so far as promotion to the post of Junior Engineer Gr.II (AC) is concerned, the same should permissible without any interference of inter-divisional transfers.”
Aggrieved by Ext. P5 order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioners are before this Court in this Writ Petition.
W.P.(C) No. 7219 of 2009
: 4 :
In the said circumstances, without expressing anything on the legality or otherwise of such a direction issued in Ext.P5 order, this Writ Petition is disposed of recording the submission made by the learned counsel for the respondent/applicant that, since the respondent/applicant has already retired from service, that the petitioners are not required to comply with that direction.
Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE
Sd/- ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE
kmd
/True copy/
P.A. To Judge
Union of India
P.R. Gangadharan
P.R. Ramachandran Menon
Anil K. Narendran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
