IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2009 / 6TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 3997 of 2008(S) OA.825/2006 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH PETITIONERS: 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O.,CHENNAI-3 2. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. BY ADV.SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.STANDING COUNSEL,RAILWAYS RESPONDENT: K.RAJAN,S/O.KUTTAN, EX.CASUAL LABOURER SOUTHERN RAILWAY, RESIDING AT PARACKAL HOUSE MELEPPURAM, OLAVAKKODE, PALGHAT. BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDASWAMY SMT.D.HEERA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 3997 OF 2008 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of July, 2009 JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J. This Writ Petition is filed by the respondents in O.A. No. 825 of 2006 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. The brief facts of the case are the following: 2. The respondent herein was the applicant before the Tribunal. He was an ex-casual labourer of Palakkad Division of the Southern Railway. As per Annexure A1 Casual Labour Service Card, produced along with Ext.P6 Original Application, the applicant/respondent has 119 days of casual service in Palakkad Division. Though the applicant belonged to the backward community, he cannot get the benefit of age relaxation, as he did not have 120 days of casual service. Feeling aggrieved by the refusal of the writ petitioners to regularise his service, in view of the relevant orders, the Original Application was filed. The motion before the Tribunal was preceded by Annexure A4 representation which would show, inter alia, that the respondent/applicant had worked for ten days at Quilandy between January, 1984 and 6.2.1984. One of the grievance W.P.(C) NO. 3997/2008 2 raised in the Original Application was non-consideration of Annexure A4. The Tribunal called for the records. The left hand thumb impression register of one Rajan, son of Kuttan, who had worked at Quilandy on 27.1.1984, was also produced by the respondent. The Tribunal did not think that the number of days worked by the applicant/respondent was relevant and hence allowed the Original Application, without resolving the above dispute, that is, whether the applicant had completed 120 days of service as casual labourer. Feeling aggrieved by the above decision of the Tribunal, which was rendered as per Ext.P9 order, the Writ Petition is filed by the respondents therein. 3. We heard Sri. M.C. Cherian, learned counsel for the writ petitioners and Sri. T.C. Govindaswamy, learned counsel for the respondent. The dispute between the parties lie in a very narrow compass. If the respondent had worked for one more day, he would be eligible to be considered for regularisation and age relaxation. The respondent would assert that LTI No.199 relating of K. Rajan, who was engaged at Quilandy on 27.1.1984 is his thumb impression. But, the writ petitioners would point out that there was no physical verification of the left hand thumb impression of the applicant with the above LTI No.199 and that it can be ascertained only after physical verification by a finger print expert. W.P.(C) NO. 3997/2008 3 4. In view of the above position, we remand the matter for resolving the above dispute by the second writ petitioner. He may cause an inspection of the left hand thumb impression of the respondent with that of the impression in LTI No. 199 and find out whether it was the respondent who was engaged at Quilandy on 27.1.1984. If the decision is in favour of the applicant/respondent, he will be entitled to be considered for regularisastion, ignoring the age limit prescribed. In other words, he shall be regularised, if he is otherwise qualified, ignoring the age limit. The second writ petitioner shall cause verification of the left hand thumb impression of the respondent within three months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment and if the decision is in favour of the respondent, consequential orders shall be passed regarding his regularisation within one month thereafter. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. (K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.P.(C) NO. 3997/2008 4 K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.P.(C)NO.3997/2008 JUDGMENT 28th July, 2009 W.P.(C) NO. 3997/2008 5