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 14TH JULY 2008 / 23RD ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19590 of 2008(S) -------------------------- OA.720/2007 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER: ------------ 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POSTS, MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATIONS, DEPARTMENT OF POSTS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE POSTMASTER GENERAL, NORTHERN REGION, CALICUT. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES, THALASSERY DIVISION, THALASSERY - 670 102. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR RESPONDENTS: ------------- P.V.GOPI, S/O.LATE KUNHIRAMAN, OFFICIATING GROUP D, HEAD OFFICE, THALASSERY, RESIDING AT PARVATHY NIVAS, MATTANNUR P.O., PIN : 670 702. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ. ----------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.19590 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF JULY, 2008 J U D G M E N T Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioners are the respondents in O.A.No.720/07. The respondent herein was the applicant. He was a Gramin Dak Sevak Mail Deliverer in Thalassery Postal Division and is officiating in Group D post. He claims, he has a right to be considered for regularisation for appointment to Group D post. Since he was completing 50 years of age, he submitted a representation before the competent authority to fill up the existing vacant posts in Group D cadre expeditiously so that he will also be considered for appointment before he attains the age of 50. The CAT directed the petitioners to consider his representation. The CAT also referred to a similar case dealt with by it in O.A.No.537/04. This Writ Petition is filed challenging the said order of the CAT, which is produced as Exhibit P2. 2. The petitioners pointed out that the decision in O.A.No.537/04 was challenged before this Court and this Court declared that the principles laid down there will be confined to the parties in that O.A. Therefore, the Tribunal should not have asked W.P.(C)No.19590/08 -2- them to consider the claim of the petitioner, it is submitted. We find that there is no merit in this Writ Petition. The writ petitioners are wasting their time and also public money in filing this Writ Petition. In that process, this Court's valuable time is also wasted. If the CAT directs the petitioners to consider the genuine grievance of an employee raised by him in his representation, they are bound to consider that representation. It is improper for them to challenge that order before this Court. In the result, the Writ Petition fails and it is dismissed. K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE. M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE. dsn