IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2008 / 3RD MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 14478 of 2004(S) -------------------------- OA.601/2001 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY HEADQUARTERS OFFICE, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI-3. 2. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. 3. SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALGHAT DIVISION, PALGHAT. BY ADV. SRI.T.S.RAJAN, SC, RAILWAYS SRI.JAMES KURIAN, SC, RAILWAYS RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. M.GOKULNATH, SENIOR COMMERCIAL CLERK, SOUTHERN RAILWAY OTTAPPALAM, RESIDING AT 2/50, "VISHNU PRIYA", VISHNU NAGAR, PALGHAT 678 733. 2. P.VIJAYAKUMAR, SENIOR GENERAL CLERK (SR.GLC), COMMERCIAL BRANCH, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, ERODE RAILWAY STATION P.O., ERODE. 3. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH, SASTHA TEMPLE ROAD, ERNAKULAM. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: 2 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30.9.2003 IN O.A.NO. 601 OF 2001 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN O.A. 601 OF 2001 FILED BY THE APPLICANT BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM DATED 15.5.2001 EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS IN I.A. 601 OF 2001 DATED 23.9.2001 BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE. C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. -------------------------------------------- W.P.C. No. 14478 OF 2004 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT C.N. Ramachandran Nair,J. Even though W.P.C. is defective for want of service on the first respondent, as matter is pending over three years, we heard the Railways' counsel appearing for the petitioner. The order under challenge is Ext.P1 issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal granting notional seniority to the first respondent, who, while working as diesel fitter, was declared medically unfit and was given an alternate job of commercial clerk. The question arose was only with regard to effective date of seniority in the new post given to applicant. The Tribunal noticed that when the applicant was declared medically unfit, he was given an equal post in the administrative side, that is commercial clerk. The finding of the Tribunal is that seniority given to the applicant in the post of commercial clerk from 10.10.1995 was not justified because he was a diesel fitter grade II as on 4.2.1989, when he 2 was declared unfit to continue in the job. We do not find anything wrong in the order of the Tribunal in giving notional seniority with effect from the date on which applicant was given alternate assignment. W.P. therefore fails and is dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. kk 3