IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 29833 of 2006(S) --------------------------------------- OA.653/2005 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN, CHENNAI-3. 3. THE CHIEF PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN, CHENNAI-3. 4. THE SR.DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. 5. THE SR.DIVISIONAL COMMERCIAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. 6. THE CHIEF VIGILANCE OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, HEAD QUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN, CHENNAI-3. 7. THE CHIEF COMMERCIAL MANAGER, (PASSENGER SERVICE), SOUTHERN RAILWAY, MADRAS. BY ADV. MR.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS. W.P.(C). NO.29833/2006-S: RESPONDENT: --------------------- PRASANTH KUMAR, S/O.CHANDRADAS, SENIOR TICKET COLLECTOR, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, MANGALORE, RESIDING AT RAILWAY QUARTERS, M.H.18-A, MANGALORE. BY ADV. MR.MARTIN G.THOTTAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.29833/2006-S: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. JC.VO/1648/2005 DTD. 24/02/2005 OF P.5. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 24/08/2006 OF RESPONDENT. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.J/C-VO/1648/2005 DTD. 25/08/2005 OF P.5. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. O/ONO.J/TV-26/05 DTD. 25/08/2005 OF P.4. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD. 29/08/2005 OF MEDICAL OFFICER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE DTD. 07/09/2005 OF DIVISIONAL MEDICAL OFFICER. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE O.A. NO. 653/2005 OF CAT/ ERNAKULAM ALONG WITH ANNEXURES, FILED BY RESPONDENT HEREIN. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE AMENDMENT PETITION ALONG WITH ANNEXURES, FILED IN O.A. NO. 653/2005 BY R.1. HEREIN. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A. NO. 653/2005 FILED BY RAILWAY. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT IN THE AMENDMENT PETITION IN O.A. NO. 653/2005. EXT.P.11: COPY OF THE REJOINDER IN O.A. NO. 653/2005 OF CAT/ERNAKULAM. EXT.P.12: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 19/07/2006 IN O.A. NO. 653/2005 OF CAT/ERNAKULAM. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. prv. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P(C) NO: 29833 OF 2006 S ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd January, 2009. JUDGMENT BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, J. The respondents in O.A.653/2005 are the writ petitioners. The applicant therein is the respondent. By Ext.P12 impugned order the Central Administrative Tribunal interfered with the transfer of the applicant from Mangalore to Tiruchirappalli. The applicant was under suspension as part of disciplinary proceedings. He was reinstated by Annexure A1 order and simultaneously he was transferred to Tiruchirappalli. Challenging the transfer the O.A was filed. The transfer order Annexure A5 was served on him subsequently. He amended the O.A and incorporated the challenge against A5 also. The Central Administrative Tribunal interfered with the transfer and set aside the order transferring him by Ext.P12 order. Aggrieved by that order this writ petition is filed. 2. During the pendency of the writ petition the respondent herein gave notice of voluntary retirement proposing to retire from service on 8.4.2007. Though the railways have not passed any orders on the application, the applicant approached the CAT and got a declaration that he has already retired voluntarily and also got a further direction to disburse the pensionary benefits due to him. It is common case that now the petitioner is not attending his duty. WPC 29833/2006 2 According to the applicant he is not in service. The Railways submit that the applicant is not presently attending duty but whether he has retired from service etc. are matters which have not become final. According to us since the petitioner is no longer attending duty the validity of his transfer has become irrelevant. If the claim of the petitioner that he has already retired from service in view of the order of the CAT, is correct, then the writ petition is infructuous. Whatever be the position it is unnecessary to hear the matter on merits. Accordingly it is closed without prejudice to the contentions of both sides. It is made clear that the legal principles laid down by the CAT in the impugned order will not bind the Railways as a precedent. If the same is pressed into service, in some other case, they will be free to attack its correctness, notwithstanding the dismissal of this writ petition. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj WPC 29833/2006 3 K.K.DENESAN & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ---------------------------------------------------- M.F.A.NO: ----------------------------------------------------- JUDGMENT Dated: