IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26144 of 2008(K) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- R. BHARGHAVAN PILLAI, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN NAIR, RAILWAY QUARTERS 425/B, NEAR DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PALAKKAD -2 DIVISIONAL SECRETARY, SOUTHERN RAILWAY EMPLOYEE'S SANGH, PALAKKAD DIVISION. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SMT.SMITHA GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, RAILWAY DEPARTMENT, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERSONAL BRANCH, PALAKKAD. 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER WORKS, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERSONAL BRANCH, PALAKKAD. 4. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONAL OFFICER, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH,SC, RAILWAYS FOR R1 TO 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.26144 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of August, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is the representative of a Union of employees of the Southern Railway, which could not muster enough strength for being recognised as a Union of the employees. As a result, the petitioner's Union became disentitled to the privileges given to recognised Unions. Therefore, the petitioner's Union was directed to vacate the building, which was occupied by the Union. Another representative of the very same Union earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.14265/2008, in which I passed Ext.P1 judgment granting the petitioner's Union some time to vacate the building. That time is no longer over. Now the petitioner, claiming to be representing the very same Union, has filed this writ petition contending that as an affiliate of a Federal Union, the petitioner's Union is entitled to the very same privileges of the Federal Union. W.P.(c)No.26144/08 2 I am of opinion that, that was a contention, which the petitioner ought to have raised in W.P.(C)No.14265/2008. That being so, the petitioner cannot now file another writ petition for the same relief on a different ground. Therefore, I do not find any merit in this writ petition and accordingly the same is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.26144/08 3