IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2010 / 14TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 20491 of 2010(S) -------------------------- OA.259/2007 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MS.RADHIKA DORAISWAMY, DIRECTOR GENERAL POSTS & SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS, NEW DELHI. 2. MS.SHOBA KOSHY, CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL, KERALA CIRCLE, TRIVANDRUM-695 033. 3. M.MOHANDAS, SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT RAILWAY MAIL SERVICE, TV DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM-695 036. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC RESPONDENT(S): --------------- K.KUNJUMON, MAILMAN (TBOP), SUB RECORD OFFICE, RAILWAY MAIL SERVICE, KOLLAM, RESIDING AT `JOJO VILLA' HARISREE NAGAR-53, KOLLAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN & S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN, JJ. ------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO.20491 OF 2010 () ----------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. This writ petition is filed by three senior officers of the Union of India. They face proceedings before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, alleging disobedience of the final order in O.A.No.259 of 2007. The order on the said O.A. was affirmed by this Court on 11.1.2010 in W.P. (C).No.739 of 2010. It appears from Ext.P4 that the plea of the Department was that the earlier judgment of this Court had been taken up in appeal to the Supreme Court of India. However, even as of now, the Department is unable to state whether an SLP has been numbered by the Apex Court as against the decision in O.A.No.259 of 2007 and W.P.(C).No.739 of 2010. Under such circumstances, we do not find any illegality in the stand taken by the Tribunal in the impugned Ext.P6 order WP(C).20491/2010 2 requiring obedience of its directions in O.A.No.259 of 2007, at least provisionally and subject to the outcome of the matters taken up to the Supreme Court. However, we are inclined to agree with the learned counsel for the petitioners that the time limit of 20 days fixed by the Tribunal in Ext.P6 order needs to be enlarged on indulgence, having regard to the fact that the Apex Court is re-opening after midsummer vacation on 7.7.2010. We, accordingly, dismiss this writ petition, however enlarging the time in terms of Ext.P6 by two weeks from today. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN JUDGE S.S.SATHEESACHANDRAN JUDGE prp WP(C).20491/2010 3