-1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO. 3063 OF 2001 Union of India, through General Manager, C. Rly. ...Petitioner versus G.N. Rao and others ...Respondents Mr. Suresh Kumar for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Walia for the respondents. WITH WRIT PETITION NO. 228 OF 2003 Union of India, through General Manager, W. Rly. ...Petitioner versus S.B. Mandwe and others ...Respondents Mr. Suresh Kumar for the petitioner. None for the respondents. CORAM: P.B. MAJMUDAR & R.M. SAVANT, JJ. DATE: JULY 09, 2009. P.C. Since common point is involved in both these matters, these matters are taken up for hearing today. -2- 2. The main grievance of the petitioners in both these petitions is regarding provision of reservation finding place in paragraph 10 of the original Board Circular dated 27th January, 1993. The Tribunal allowed the Original Applications filed by the respondents and quashed paragraph 10 of the said circular. The Tribunal relied upon the judgment of other Benches of the Tribunal. However, it is pointed out by the learned counsel appearing in Writ Petition No. 3063 of 2001 that the judgment in question is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India vs. Pushpa Rani and others1. On the said basis, this Court has also disposed of Writ Petition No. 1631 of 2006 and other cognate matters by an order dated 17th March, 2009. Considering the said aspect and considering the fact that the point in issue is already covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court, Writ Petition No. 3063 of 2001 is allowed by setting aside the impugned order dated 6th June, 2001. 3. So far as Writ Petition No. 228 of 2003 is concerned, none appears for the respondent. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy raised in this petition is identical and accordingly the said petition is also required to be allowed by setting aside the order of the Tribunal dated 6th May, 2002. 1 (2008) 9 SCC 242 -3- 4. Considering the said aspect and considering the fact that the point in issue is already covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India (supra), Rule in each of these petitions is made absolute. P. B. MAJMUDAR, J. R.M. SAVANT, J.