Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 1, Cited by 34]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

The Applicants In This Case Have Sought A ... vs . Union Of India & Ors., Which Is Reported ... on 29 September, 2011

      

  

  

 Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench


OA No. 3576/2011
MA No. 2609/2011


New Delhi, this the 29th day of September, 2011


Honble Mr. Justice V.K. Bali, Chairman
Honble Dr. R.C. Panda, Member (A)

1.	N. Rajarathinam 
s/o Sh. Namasivayam,
R/o 20/H, Kala Flats,
Kannapar Road, 
Ashok Nagar,
Chennai  600 083.

2.	P.Ramaraj
S/o S. Perumal Samy,
R/o 73/7, CPWD Qtrs.,
Thirumangalam Anna Nagar,
Chennai  600 040.

3.	S. Chudalayandi
S/o S. Kandaswamy Asari,
R/o G.F.1, Sabareesh Apartment,
No.2, Sekkizhar Street,
Kamarajapuram, Main Road,
Kamarajapuram, Chennai  600 073.

4.	E. Chandiran,
S/o T. Eggappa Reddy,
R/o No. 12, Bharathidasan Street,
Pattabiram,
Chennai  600 072.

5.	R. Krishna Moorthy,
S/o K. Rangasamy,
R/o No. 22/7, CPWD Qtrs.,
Besant Nagar,
Chennai  600 090.

6.	T.M. Ganga Sah,
S/o Sh. T.M. Munusamy Sah,
R/o Plot No. D-3, Sri Ayush Rahema Nagar,
Prathyangara Homes Apartments,
Rajakilpakkam, Chennai-600 073.
& Others.

(By Advocate: Mr. M.K. Bhardwaj)
Versus


1.	Union of India through Secretary,
	Government of India,
Ministry of Urban Affairs & Employment,
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi  110 001.

2.	The Director General of Works,
	Central Public Works Department,
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi.			Respondents

ORDER (ORAL)

Justice V.K. Bali, Chairman:

The applicants in this case have sought a direction to be issued to the respondents to extend the benefits of the judgment of this Tribunal in OA No.299/CH/2007 in the matter of C.M. Malhotra and two others vs. Union of India & Ors., which is reported to have been upheld by the Honble High Court and the Honble Supreme Court, and which is also reported to have been implemented by the respondents vide order dated 06.04.2010 (Annexure A-1). It is the submission of the learned counsel for the applicants that the applicants in this case are identically placed as the applicants in the aforementioned O.A.

2. In view of this submission, we dispose of this Original Application at the admissible stage itself, without going into the merits of the case and without prejudice to the rights of the respondents, by directing the respondents to verify from their original records as to whether the applicants are identically placed as those in the aforementioned OA and if so, extend the same benefits as have been extended to the applicants in the aforementioned OA, in accordance with law. The respondents are directed to pass a speaking order in this regard within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

3. With the above directions, the Original Application stands disposed of.

4. Registry is directed to forward a copy of this Original Application along with a copy of this order to Respondent no.2.

 (Dr. R.C. Panda)							     	(V.K. Bali)
    Member (A)						     		Chairman

/naresh/