IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 31ST MARCH 2008 / 11TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 10750 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.187/2007 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER,SOUTHERN RAILWAY, MADRAS-3. 2. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.TPM.IBRAHIM KHAN,SENIOR PANEL COUNSEL RESPONDENT: ------------- LAKSHMI, VALLIKODE, KINAWALLOOR.P.O., PALAKKAD, WORKING AS TRACKMAN, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, QUILANDI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N.RAVINDRAN, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 10750 OF 2008-S ----------------------------------------- Dated 31st March, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in O.A. No.187/2007 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench are the writ petitioners. The respondent herein was the applicant before the Tribunal. The said O.A was allowed by Ext.P4 order. The applicant was a daily wage casual labourer, who was engaged on 5.3.1975. She was terminated from service on 21.6.1980. She approached the Labour Court. The Labour Court by its award, directed reinstatement of the applicant, subject to the same terms and conditions that were applicable to her earlier, but without back wages. The order of the Labour Court became enforceable with effect from 7.7.1998. But, the petitioners herein challenged that order before this Court by filing O.P.No.26548/1998. The said O.P was dismissed. Writ Appeal No.1172/2003, attempted against that judgment was also dismissed on 25.2.2005. Thereafter, she was re-engaged with effect from 4.10.2005. She WPC 10750/2008 2 claimed retrospective effect to her engagement from 1998. The same was not acceptable to the writ petitioners. So, she moved the C.A.T. The Tribunal by Ext.P4 order, directed that she should be treated as re-engaged with effect from 7.7.1998 with all consequential service benefits except arrears of pay. 2. The Railways attack the said finding, contending that Annexure- A7 order, by which the applicant was granted temporary status, was accepted by her. Therefore, she cannot turn round and challenge it later. We feel that a serious injustice has been done to the applicant by the writ petitioners without implementing the award immediately after it became enforceable. They dragged her from court to court. Now, they cannot take advantage of their own illegal conduct. Therefore, we find nothing wrong with the direction of the C.A.T. Justice has been done in this case. We also agree with the reasons and conclusions of the C.A.T. We uphold the direction of the C.A.T that the applicant should be treated as having entered service with effect from the date, the award of the Labour Court became WPC 10750/2008 3 enforceable. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N.RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. Nm/