IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 3RD JULY 2009 / 12TH ASHADHA 1931 RP.No. 1204 of 2008(S) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.11288/2008 Dated 26/05/2008 --------------------- REVIEW PETITIONER/IST RESPONDENT IN WPC --------------------------------- V.SASIKALA, HEAD CLERK, WORKING AS OFFICE SUPDT.GR.II, (ADHOC), DPO'S OFFICE, PERSONNEL BRANCH, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.ABRAHAM RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS & RESPONDENTS IN WPC ----------------------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, CHENNAI. 3. DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, TRIVANDRUM DIVISION, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM. 4. P.SETHUMADHAVAN, HEAD CLERK, NOW WORKING AS OFFICE SUPDT.GR.II(ADHOC) SE/P WAY, ALLEPPEY, SOUTHERN RAILWAY DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM. 5. V.S.PADMAVATHY, HEAD CLERK, PERSONNEL BRANCH, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM. 6. P.GANAPATHY, HEAD CLERK, NOW WORKING AS OFFICE SUPDT.GR.II (ADHOC) SR.DPO'S OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM. R.P.No.1204/2008 7. T.H.VIJAYAKUMARI, HEAD CLERK, SR.DPO/TVC NOW WORKING AS DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER'S OFFICE ON DEPUTATION, SOUTHERN RAILWAY DIVISION, TRIVANDRUM. 8. GEORGE KURIAN, HEAD CLERK, NOW WORKING IN THE OFFICE OF THE SENIOR SECTION ENGINEER (P.WAY), OFFICE, ALWAYE. 9. K.LATHA, HEAD CLERK, PERSONNEL BRANCH, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM. 10. K.SUDHALATHA,OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT.GR II PERSONNEL BRANCH, SOUTHERN RAILWAY DIVISIONAL OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM. 11. K.MURALEEDHARAN, OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT GR.II, PERSONNEL BRANCH, SOUTHERN RAILWAY DIVISIONAL OFFICE, TRIVANDRUM. 12. SEBASTIAN GEORGE, OFFICE SUPERINTENDENT GR.II, PERSONNEL BRANCH, SOUTHERN RAILWAY DIVISIONAL OFFICE. ADV. SRI.M.C.CHERIAN,SR.SC.,RAILWAYS THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/07/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. -------------------------------- R.P.No. 1204 OF 2008 IN W.P.(C) No.11288 OF 2008 -------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of July, 2009 O R D E R ~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. We heard the learned counsel on both sides. In the judgment under review, this Court ordered as follows: “Since the point raised by the writ petitioners is covered by the judgments of this Court which were rendered relying on certain decisions of the Apex Court, these writ petitions are also dismissed. If, ultimately, the very same point raised in these writ petitions is held in favour of the writ petitioners by the Apex Court, they are given liberty to make the said decision applicable in these cases also. But, it is clarified that this direction will not operate as a stay against the orders of the CAT impugned in these writ petitions, pending disposal of similar matters by the Apex Court.” 2. In the earlier part of the judgment, this Court noticed the submission of the writ petitioners/respondents that similar matters arising from other High Courts are R.P.No.1204/2008 2 pending before the Apex Court and if there is a decision in their favour in those matters before the Apex Court, they may be given permission to make those decisions applicable to these cases on hand also. But, what we said in the judgment under appeal is already quoted above. It only meant that the point raised by the writ petitioners/respondents in the connected writ petitions is reversed or modified by the Apex Court and the Railways will be able to implement the same in relation to identical matters, which we have already disposed of. We only meant that, if an appeal is filed from one of the decisions of this Court and the respondents/writ petitioners get a decision in their favour, then that can be made applicable to other identical cases also. In other words, we did not mean that, if there is a decision in favour of the writ petitioners/respondents in the matters arising from other High Courts, which according to the review petitioners are not similar matters, that can be implemented here also. With this clarification, this Review Petition is disposed of. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps