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 20TH OCTOBER 2008 / 28TH ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 27887 of 2008(S) -------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26/02/2008 IN RA 03/08 IN OA.122/2003 OF CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ENVIRONMENT & FORESTS, PARYAVARAN BHAVAN, C.G.O COMPLEX, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI -3. 2. INSTITUTE OF WOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY P.O. MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE -3, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR. 3. INSTITUTE OF FORESTS GENETICS & TREE BREEDING, R.S. PURAM P.O., COIMBATORE -2, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR. 4. INDIAN COUNCIL OF FORESTRY RESEARCH & EDUCATION, P.O. NEW FOREST, DEHRADUN, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL, SR.PANEL RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ M.J. ANTONY, LOWER DIVISION CLERK, GENETICS & TREE BREEDING DIVISION, INSTITUTE OF FOREST GENETICS & TREE BREEDING, COIMBATORE -2. SRI.M.J.ANTONY (PARTY IN PERSON) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO. 27887/2008-S APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 26/02/2008 OF THE CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH IN RA.3/2008 IN O.A.122/2003. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE O.A.122/2003 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE CAT, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF PETITIONERS IN O.A.122/2003. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REJOINDER FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN EXT.P3 REPLY STATEMENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE ADDL REPLY TO EXT.P3 FILED ALONG WITH M.A TO ACCEPT THE ADDL. REPLY. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27/09/2005 IN OA 122/2003. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 03/10/2007 OF THE DIV. BENCH OF HONOURABLE HIGH COURT IN W.P.(C). NO. 4113/2007. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE R .A.3/2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS IN O.A.122/2003. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENT IN EXT.P8 R.A. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE CONTAINING THE EXTRACT OF APEX COURT DECISION IN NIVA GHOSH vs. UOI. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE STATEMENT SHOWING THE CASUAL DAILY LABOUR SERVICE PERIOD OF THE RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28/01/1984 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT BEFORE THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P13: COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 02/04/1984 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER PURSUANCE TO EXT.P12 LETTER TERMINATING THE SERVICE OF THE RESPONDENT w.e.f.02/04/1984. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R1: COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT IN 1ST WRIT PETITION NO.4113 OF 2007. EXT.R2: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 05/10/2007. EXT.R3: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 03/07/2007. EXT.R4: COPY OF THE MEMO ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 25/08/2008. EXT.R5: COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER REGARDING CONFIDENTIAL REPORTS. EXT.R6: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE THEN OFFICE REGULARLY. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.27887 OF 2008 S ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF OCTOBER, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The Writ Petitioners are the respondents in O.A.No.122/2003 on the files of the CAT, Ernakulam Bench. The respondent herein approached the CAT claiming two increments payable to him in the light of the relevant orders and also for counting 50% of his past casual service for pensionary benefits. Both the reliefs were granted by the CAT by Exhibit P6 order dated 27.9.2005. The petitioners challenged that order of the CAT before this Court. The said Writ Petition was dismissed by this Court by Exhibit P7 judgment dated 3.10.2007. The petitioners took up a contention that there was a break of about two years between 1984 and 1986 and only 50% of the continuous casual service of the respondent/applicant can be counted for computing his pensionary benefits. This Court was not inclined to consider that point and directed them to move the CAT in review, if so advised. Thereafter, the writ petitioners filed Exhibit P2 review application. The said application was dismissed by the CAT by W.P.(C)No. 27887/08 -2- Exhibit P1 order dated 26.2.2008. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the said order and also seeking consequential reliefs. 2. The petitioners submit, the respondent's continuous service is only from 17.11.1986. Therefore, the casual service rendered thereafter alone could be counted. The respondent, who appeared in person, has filed a counter affidavit. He submitted that to avoid further litigation, he is ready to accept the said stand of the writ petitioners. So, it is ordered that the casual service rendered by the respondent from 17.11.1986 upto his date of regularisation shall be reckoned for grant of pensionary benefits and 50% thereof shall be taken into account, while computing his terminal benefits. In this Writ Petition, the petitioners have also challenged the direction of the CAT to grant two increments. But, we notice that the said claim has been considered by this Court and rejected by Exhibit P7 judgment. The said judgment has become final. Therefore, challenge against the direction to grant two increments again in this Writ Petition is plainly untenable and is barred. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of modifying Exhibit P1 by ordering that the casual service rendered by the respondent from 17.11.1986 need alone be reckoned for grant of pensionary benefits to W.P.(C)No. 27887/08 -3- him. The benefits following from the order of the CAT shall be granted to the respondent within two months from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn