IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CWP No. 7782 of 2011 Date of Decision: May 3, 2011 Union of India and others …Petitioners Versus Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURDEV SINGH Present: Mr. Sanjay Goyal, Advocate for the petitioners. 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. The Union of India and its officers have filed the instant petition under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging order dated 14.12.2010 (P-4) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’). The Tribunal has placed reliance on its earlier order dated 30.05.2007 rendered in the case of Bhag Singh v. Union of India (OA No. 223/CH/06). 2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the considered view that the issue raised in these petitions is no longer res integra. Against similar orders passed by the Tribunal a number of petitions have already been filed by the Union of India and its officers, which have been dismissed by this Court like in the cases of Union of India and others v. Central Administrative Tribunal and others (Civil Writ Petition No. 7274- C.W.P. No. 7782-CAT of 2011 2 CAT of 2002, decided on 9.5.2002); Commander Works Engineer, Headquarters, Ambala Cantt. v. Sukhdev Singh and others (CWP No. 19802-CAT of 2006, decided on 17.04.2009); Union of India and others v. Baldev Singh and others (CWP No. 18963-CAT of 2003, decided on 17.04.2009); Union of India and others v. Joginder Singh and another (CWP No. 21609 of 2010, decided on 6.12.2010); and Union of India and others v. Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh and another (CWP Nos. 42 and 77 of 2011, decided on 4.1.2011). There is no distinguishing feature pointed out by the learned counsel for the petitioners between the matters already decided and the case in hand. 3. We find no merit in the instant petition warranting admission and accordingly the same is dismissed. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (GURDEV SINGH) May 3, 2011 JUDGE Pkapoor