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 16TH JUNE 2008 / 26TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16185 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.69/2005 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------ P.P. LONAPPAN,ASSISTANT ACCOUNTS OFFICER (RETIRED),KOTTAYAM CENTRAL DIVISION,CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING,SHASTRI BHAWAN, KOTTAYAM, NOW RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.31/848, PAINADATH HOUSE, VAREKKAT ROAD, PONNURUNNI,VYTTILA KOCHI-19. BY ADV. SRI.BABU PAUL RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CONTROLLER GENERAL OF ACCOUNTS, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF EXPENDITURE, NEW DELHI. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KOTTAYAM CENTRAL DIVISION CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SHASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASST.SG THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Writ Petition (C) No.16185 of 2008-S -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Judgment Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 order of the CAT dated 07.11.2006 in OA No.69/05. There is considerable delay in challenging that order. The petitioner submits, the respondents in that OA have preferred Writ Petition (C) No.22718/07 before this court, challenging Ext.P1 and so, he was constrained to file this Writ Petition, supporting the said order. We feel that to support an order in the nature of Ext.P1, the petitioner need not file any fresh Writ Petition. He can support that order on all grounds, including on those grounds, if any, which were found against him by the CAT. So, this Writ Petition is unnecessary. He can raise all the grounds raised in this Writ Petition in support of the order of the CAT, which is substantially in his favour. Accordingly, the Writ Petition is dismissed without prejudice to the contentions of the petitioner. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE 16.06.2008 M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE True copy PA TO JUDGE 2 sta 3