IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: January 31, 2011 1. CWP No. 1771 of 2011 Union of India and others …Petitioners Versus Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench & others …Respondents 2. CWP No. 1772 of 2011 Union of India and others …Petitioners Versus Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench & others …Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. KUMAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE T.P.S. MANN Present: Mr. Gautam Kaile, Advocate, for Mr. Rajiv Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). 1. To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? M.M. KUMAR, J. 1. This order shall dispose of CWP Nos. 1771 and 1772 of 2011, which have been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging orders dated 7.4.2010 and 19.11.2009 respectively, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for brevity, ‘the Tribunal’). The Tribunal has held that the original applicant-respondent(s) are entitled to facilities of the Central Government Health Scheme on usual payment of subscription fee at par with other Central Government pensioners for one year, which is extendable on yearly basis. In that regard Tribunal has followed the earlier decisions rendered in OA Nos. 955/CH/2003, 217/HR/2004, 833/CH/2005 and 69/PB/2010. CWP Nos. 1771 and 1772 of 2011 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has fairly conceded that the view taken by the Tribunal earlier and the one taken in the impugned orders has attained finality and either such orders have not been challenged further or the writ petitions challenging such orders have been dismissed. 3. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner(s), we are of the view that no interference is called for in the order passed by the Tribunal. Moreover, the relief has been granted only for a period of one year extendable on yearly basis till outcome of the writ petition pending in the High Court of Karnataka. Accordingly, we do not find any ground to admit these petitions. Similar view has been taken by a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Union of India and others v. Central Administrative Tribunal and others (CWP No. 21622 of 2010, decided on 6.12.2010). 4. As a sequel to the above discussion, these petitions fail and the same are dismissed. 5. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. (M.M. KUMAR) JUDGE (T.P.S. MANN) January 31, 2011 JUDGE Pkapoor 2