IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2008 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 16037 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.79/2007 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF AGRICULTURE, DEPARTMENT OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY AND DAIRYING KRISHI BHAVAN, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2. THE DIRECTOR, CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FISHERIES, NAUTICAL & ENGG. TRAINING DEWAN'S ROAD, COCHIN-16. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR RESPONDENTS: ------------- V.RADHAKRISHNAN, S/O.K.NARAYANAN NAIR, FITTER, CENTRAL INSTITUTE OF FISHERIES NAUTICAL & ENGG. TRAINING, COCHIN-16. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.16037 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF JUNE, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The respondents in O.A.No.79/07 are the writ petitioners. The applicant therein is the respondent. The applicant while working as a fitter was regularised in service on 30.1.1987. The writ petitioners have some dispute regarding the claim of the applicant/respondent that he was working as a regular hand from 30.1.1987. According to them, he was working only as an ad hoc employee. But, the said dispute has no bearing on the outcome of this case. He entered service as a casual labourer in 1986. While serving as a regular employee, he was terminated from service. The applicant challenged his termination from service by filing O.A.K.No.84/88 before the CAT. The CAT allowed the O.A. by judgment dated 4.12.1989 and issued the following direction. “ Hence the application is allowed and the respondents are directed to reinstate the applicant back to service. In the circumstances, we also direct that the applicant will be entitled to all consequential benefits flowing from his reinstatement except that he will not be entitled to any wages for the period he W.P.(C)No. 16037/08 -2- was out of service.” 2. Going by the above direction, the applicant is entitled to all service benefits for the period he was get out except back wages. When the said service was not counted for granting increments, fixation of pay and also for ACP benefits, the present O.A. was filed. The said O.A. was allowed by Exhibit P12. The operative portion of the said order reads as follows: “ In view of the above, the OA succeeds. It is declared that the period from 03-06-1987 to 11-02-1990 during which the applicant was out of service, shall be treated as regular service for all purposes, including for grant of notional increments, for working out 12 years of regular service for ACP purposes and fixation of pay. Thus, Annexure A-4 and A-9 which do not conform to the above are liable to be quashed and we accordingly order. The respondents shall work out the pay of the applicant from 1990 onwards, consider the applicant for ACP from the date the applicant completed 12 years of service or 09-08- 1999 whichever is later and such amounts due to the applicant shall be duly paid to the applicant within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.” 3. Going by the directions issued in O.A.K.84/88 by the CAT, we have no doubt in our mind that the applicant was entitled to all W.P.(C)No. 16037/08 -3- service benefits for the period he was out of service except back wages. Therefore, the Tribunal has rightly allowed the present O.A. and issued the above quoted directions. We find no reason to interfere with the said order. We agree with the reasons and conclusions of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn