IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2011 / 27TH POUSHA 1932 RP.No. 788 of 2010(S) -------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.24556/2006 DATED 16/02/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/PETITONERS ----------------------------------------------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHIEF POSTMASTER GENERAL, KERALA CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICERS, IDUKKI DIVISION, THODUPUZHA. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF POSTAL SERVICES, CENTRAL REGION, OFFICE OF THE POSTMASTER GENERAL, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC RESPONDENT/RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------- C.S. PRABHAKARAN, GDSBPM (UNDER REMOVAL), S/O.LATE SANKARAN, CHALACKAL HOUSE, MANGAPARAKARA, KONNATHADY P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 563. BY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ----------------------------------- R.P.No.788 of 2010 IN W.P(C).No.24556 OF 2006 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 17th day of January, 2011 O R D E R Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan,J. The Union of India and others are before us in this review petition. The respondent, while working as Extra Departmental Branch Postmaster, faced disciplinary proceedings in March, 1993 on three counts. He, also faced criminal trial and was acquitted. Later he was reinstated in service on 16.8.2002 and back wages were paid to him till that time on the basis of the decision of the Central administrative Tribunal. Thereafter, on the day immediately following his such reinstatement, he was again put off duty and chargesheeted. That enquiry and consequential order was ultimately set aside by the Tribunal and he was ordered to be reinstated with full back wages. In this petition before us at the instance of the Union of India and others, we find no ground to interfere in terms of Articles 226 of 227 of the RP.788/10 2 Constitution of India. We, accordingly, issued the judgment sought to be reviewed holding that the findings of the Tribunal are purely on facts and in the correct perspective and are not vitiated on any question of law. This review petition is filed essentially projecting that in the earlier round, the respondent was paid only 50% of the back wages, however, that he gets full back wages from 17.8.2002. We are not impressed. If the department felt that in spite of the earlier order of the Tribunal, they had to initiate fresh proceedings, that too, after the conferment of the respondent, there is no reason why we should interfere with the Tribunal's decision for full back wages from 17.8.2002. We find no merit in the review petition. The review petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. Sd/- P.S.GOPINATHAN, Judge. kkb.20/1.