IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 31273 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- SUGATHAN, S/O.YESODHARAN, RESIDING AT KADUVAMOOLAYIL, KULATHUMON P.O., POTHUPARA 689 693 PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.VADAKARA V.V.N.MENON SRI.T.N.SUKUMARAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY, SECUNDERABAD, ANDHRA PRADESH. 2. THE REGISTRAR, RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, 13/15, MALL ROAD, DELHI-110054. 3. THE ADDL.REGISTRAR, RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL, SECUNDERABAD, ANDHRA PRADESH. 4. THE ADDL. REGISTRAR, RAILWAY CLAIMS TRIBUNAL ERNAKULAM BENCH, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI. R1 TO R4 BY ADV. SRI.R.SATISH KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC : 31273/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE CLAIM APPLICATION DATED 25.2.03 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE TRANSFER APPLICATION DATED 10.12.03 FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.RCT/DLI/MISC/2000 DATED 08.01.04 SENT FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 31273 OF 2008 ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT While the petitioner was working as a labourer in Aswini Sea Food company, Demapuram, Andra Pradesh, he met with a train accident which resulted in amputation of his leg. In respect of the same he filed an application for compensation before the Railway Claims Tribunal at Secunderabad. Due to economic and health reasons petitioner is unable to conduct the case at Secunderabad. Therefore he filed Ext.P2 application, seeking transfer of the application from Railway Claims Tribunal, Secunderabad Bench to Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. By Ext.P3 letter he was informed by the 3rd respondent that they are unable to do the needful in the matter without supplying the OA number. Petitioner is challenging Ext.P3 and seeking the following relief: “i. issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, allowing Ext.P2 transfer application and directing respondent No.3 to forward Exhibit.P1 application to the 4th respondent Bench for consideration and disposal on merit;” 2. I am of opinion that in view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, the OA has to be transferred from the 3rd respondent to the 4th respondent. Name of the petitioner and the details of the accident WPC : 31273/08 -:2:- like date etc., are stated in the writ petition itself. I do not think that it would be difficult for the 3rd respondent to find out the OA number from his office on the basis of those materials and to transfer the same to the 4th respondent. He cannot simply say that because the petitioner had not provided the OA Number he is unable to do the needful. In order to ascertain the OA number also, the petitioner would have to go over to the Secunderabad Bench which is very difficult for the petitioner in view of his disability. Therefore, I am of opinion that, the 3rd respondent should do the needful in the matter on his own without troubling the petitioner. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions: The 3rd respondent shall himself ascertain the number of the OA on the basis of the details given by the petitioner in this writ petition such as and the date of accident and also the date of the claim application, namely 25.02.03. Thereafter he shall transfer the OA to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. The above exercise shall be taken up and completed within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ttb WPC : 31273/08 -:3:-