IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 33303 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.354/2006 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.ANIL KUMAR, WORKING AS GDS MAIL PACKER, KOTTIYOOR PO., ANIL NIVAS THONDIYIL POST, PERAVOOR , KANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.M.CHATHUKUTTY NAMBIAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT , MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION NEW DELHI. 2. DIRECTOR GENERAL , DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI 3. CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL, KERALA CIRCLE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES, THALASSERY DIVISION, THALASSERY-2. 5. SUB DIVISIONAL INSPECTOR, MANATHAVADY SUB DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, MANATHAVADY. ADV. SRI.A.D.RAVINDRA PRASAD, CGC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.33303 OF 2008 S ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 17th DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner is the applicant in O.A.No.354/2006. The petitioner applied for appointment in Central Government service on compassionate ground. After several rounds of litigations, the CAT by its order dated 24.3.2005 in O.A.No.229/03 ordered appointment of the petitioner on compassionate ground. In obedience to that direction, he was appointed as Gramin Dak Sevak. The appointment was given effect only from the date of that order. The petitioner feels, he should have been given appointment with retrospective effect, as his application was pending since 1997 and he was pursuing it vigilantly. Aggrieved by the refusal of the respondents to appoint him with retrospective effect, O.A.No.354/2006 was filed. The Tribunal noted that in O.A.No.229/03 filed by him, there was a prayer to grant him appointment on compassionate ground with retrospective effect. The said O.A. was allowed. But no direction was issued regarding the retrospectivity of the appointment. So, by necessary implication that prayer was declined. In view of the W.P.(C)No.33303/08 -2- said position, the Tribunal noted that the very same prayer cannot be again agitated in the present O.A. Accordingly, O.A.No.354/2006 was dismissed by Exhibit P6 order dated 11.4.2008. This Writ Petition is filed challenging Exhibit P6. According to the petitioner, the question of grant of retrospectivity for the appointment was not considered on merit by the Tribunal in O.A.No.229/03. Therefore, he is entitled to agitate the same again. 3. We find it difficult to accept the said contention of the petitioner. The prayer sought by him was not granted in O.A.No.229/03. So, he should have challenged that order of the CAT in appropriate proceedings and sought appropriate reliefs for retrospective appointment. As long as the said order remains in force, another Original Application for the very same relief cannot be entertained. In the result, the Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn