^''^^•^'w^ys^^^:---'^: \\-^^. c- "i.i l,'-: 1 \-i HKSHGOURTOFlSMHAtTiSGARHATBlt.ASRBR DB.WOM'BliESSl-JaSJat-MRiNiBtSNMlSI-U^.A ;:l:'::.HOIS :lEiSa SfiR;lBe»E(5llJBtaaKAR.i^:.;-•'1^ Petitioner Mmi;RetiB<3 (^NO.'IS8ltof200S SRSra%^al%S/o l..ate13rayagi|tendal,agedat>^ 74years,Fgfi1-(;Ne.;3(%-Wari:tNo,-t9;SuruNanal( N^ar,DilJt,C)yiS[, Djstt.pG State.t Versus Reseondents 1. :;.3-?.'/,":/ ::3.;'::.?.:';:; Uniqn of Jndia, Ihrougtt Genieral Martager, SEC RIXs;,Heac!quarterSOfBcfi,Bi!aspur,CGState. Divjsiohat VRaitway Manager; Soutti East Cehtra) -Rai!way,'Bi!aspur,<^.Sfate.. •'';\\:-:'': ::::.:':^,^ Sr. .DivBional F'ersonriel Qfficer. •Soutft @as^ ^htralRaihway,'Bi|aspur,;©G;g&^.;»^ii'KaE;iS'^ Present: •Shn^:Kj^laug,gc^^li{o!t^!jei^g||E^||||^;|^^ ^ll"irRKISs8SIIISBKMBB— ^;^^:^^^^^^^1^^f^^^^^^^r}^^^^^!^^^^^^^^^^^^^!^^^^^^- :^^^^^^:^^^.^^^^^^s^^;^.^^^^^^l^^^^^?^^^^^^^^^^^^t?^^^^^^. .:F^DhffenoNKiM(^^^^^iyBS®3%.'^:^:^ By the ins)SWgietiJ^,BMi^;p^ order(ArmeXureP/f)^s^6aiyWeC^ntral^ntih|sSath/eT^ (jh shott We Trjbunan.^wl fufth^direBtion^WeT^po ttts case fo^ promotion tcW^n^l'if^^ dat&?hi&juni6is weire pronutt^ and fo grat^U^coHseq 18%foF8elaye<:lpayrnienitand<:leprecjSation in monfiyvalue. 02. Shri ir, learnecf;cainsel3N' tto peffljonersubmjts^^^tt^ niMh round ctflt^ationattheiR^ncecrfpetttKme^ wasfinaliytlisposed^by'^^l'nbunat^^on^^tlated^.S^ R^ pa^d^ih; Review^Aplalic^ion^No.?^^ •Ste^^to reglSSi^f^ii ar^t»r\g^penwf1r^S^^si^^^^^^^ date ofTeiristatementinace^atM;ff;^ allowances arising Iherefrofn asKffl^tie!;^sisl on ^fulyg?I'tnsKaii'icleip'^is^iyrffieF Conflrmed by jthe HigM^GciurlKjby^c)^^ 'l%ilvva^':vid&';oiider.^ite8l3rt1ygt^^ responc^ts dKt not ccmiply^^ Tribunal, the pNtionerwas'eons^ihBdtd^^^^ hotices were jssued tt»tfte respprMents. ^Howe^rer;the^GontBmpt;p8UtK^ disposed ofand the cortemnors y re discharged^ /'h / ^l 2. orcferdated 9.2^007. JSincetherespondentSdiancrtc(^ply:with^h& partoftheorderyated 4^2000 ofthe Tnbunal^anbthe^^^ was filed with the grievance that fte'is entitled to atl coinsequeniiat beneflts, including promotiori, wtiich has been^deniea fo him unjustly atMl arbitrarily, and the same has been dismissed by the impygned ordeT. Accordingto Shri Nair, th®relief, which the petitioner had claimed by the sub^queriton^nalap|MieatiQnbetore^^ft tothe petitiOB6rt^Jts8arljerc^erdated4^2000,w^ were<tirected^tDcomplywiHitheprpvisi6nsofF.R.54-A. 03. Ortthe StHer hand, Shri PS Koshy, learned c^ woultl aigue that the petitioner's appltcaUon for the sam& relief was already disposed of by the Tribunal vide orderof Annexure Pffi andthe samewas subsequently cQnfirmed by the 1-tigh Court. The peUtipner's petition fbr initjating Gontempt proceedings was also disposed of and the contemnors weradischargedafterrecordingstatementoftheRaihyaysttattheord^ the Tnbunal ^h(tey:|yty compUe(l??w^,^^a^ subsequiBntipetit|on-|l€igl%fl:H^i®tltioo^^ grounStti^tfi^^^^is|®ByBffie^pQe^rin|('l(yc(:^^ (M. Shri Nairhas r^;disput^tHattherelJe^^ in the present matter before the 'Tribunat; was already granted to the petitioner by the Tribunal white deciding his earlieroriginat appliGation, and his <onfempt? petitipn has been further disposed' of by the Tribunalafter rwordingStatementctftheFteihwaysthattheprderof^tt^ dufycompliedvnth. 05. In these circumstances, we are of tlie considered opjnion that ttie subsequentoriginalapplicationwasnotmaintaJnabtetoeforetheTribunalfor thesamer8lief,whichwassutjectmatteroftheearjierproceedJngsbetween thesameparties.andthesametiasbeenfinallydiSposeclofbytheTribunal and confirmed by ^ Nigh'Gourt We flncl no jllegaljty or inflrnuty in We flndings 6f the Tribunaf, whereby it has been heid that the claim of the petitioner is sqyarely hif by-.jtl& prineiptes of constryctive /es./ucffcate,^ Accordingly, the instant petjtion, b^f®withcut OT is hereby dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra ^ Judge R.N. Ghandrakar Judge 's" w.' .-^