Central Administrative Tribunal - Ernakulam
Henry Lawrence vs M/O Railways on 15 February, 2023
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM BENCH
Original Application Nos. 180/00700/2017,180/00690/2017,
180/00529/2017, 180/00537/2017, 180/00638/2017,
180/00666/2017, 180/00407/2017, 180/00642/2017, 180/44/2017,
180/00868/2019, 180/00872/2019, 180/00870/2019,
180/00869/2019 and 180/00890/2019
Wednesday, this the 15th day of February, 2023
CORAM:
HON'BLE Mr. JUSTICE K. HARIPAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER
O.A.No.700 of 2017
PARAMANANTHA GNANA DHAS J, Aged 61 years
S/o Y. Jebamani, (Retd. Track Maintainer,
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Southern Railway /
Thiruvananthapuram), Residing at:
Eachen Vadali Vilai, Palappallam PO
Vilavankode Taluk, Kanyakumari District
Tamil Nadu, PIN: 629 159. - Applicant
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, SPC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 2
O.A.No.690 of 2017
1. MAHARAJA PILLAI R, Aged 62 years
S/o M. Renganatha Pillai, (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Southern Railway /Nagercoil)
Residing at: No. 10/16, Police Station Road
Krishnan Kovil, Nagercoil, Kanyakumari District - 629 001.
2. SUBRAMANI N, Aged 61 years, S/o Natarajan
(Retd. Track Maintainer, Office of the
Senior Section Engineer, Permanent Way /
Southern Railway / Nagercoil), Residing at:
No.109 A2, Salaman Street, Ananthan Nagar
Asari Pallam P.O., Nagercoil - 629 201.
3. SWAMYKKAN T, Aged 61 years
S/o Thirumala Perumal, (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Southern Railway / Nagercoil)
Residing at: No.95/1, Kumarappapuram
Kottaram P.O., Kanyakumari District- 629703
4. HARISON DANIEL R, Aged 62 years
S/o Robinson Daniel, (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Works / Southern Railway / Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: 520 F, Daniel Street
Kesava Thiruppapuram, Vetturnimadam
Nagercoil 629 003.
5. SURESH LAL C R, Aged 62 years
S/o Raja Mani, (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Southern Railway / Nagercoil)
Residing at: Lal Vila, Thara Vilai, Thikkanam Code P.O.
Kanyakumari District - 629 804.
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 3
6. THIRUVAZHIMARBAN R, Aged 63 years
S/o Ramaswamy Konar. (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Southern Railway / Nagercoil)
Residing at: No.2/75, Yadava Street, Near Park
Thirupathisaram P.O., Keelour
Kanyakumari District - 629 901.
7. YESUDHASAN T, Aged 61 years
S/o Thavamony Nadar, (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Works/Southern Railway / Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: No. 15/30, Poojappura Vilai
Agastheeswaram P.O.
Kanyakumari District-629 701. - Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mrs.O.M.Shalina, SCGSC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 4
O.A.No.529 of 2017
1. HENRY LAWRENCE, Aged 61 years
S/o Lukose, (Retd.Track Maintainer
Office of the Section Engineer
Permanent Way/ Southern Railway/
Thiruvananthapuram), Residing at
"SHIJILA BHAVAN", Elanthottam
Dhanuvachapuram P.O.
Neyyattinkara Taluk
Thiruvananthapuram - 695 503.
2. C. PONNAIYYAN, Aged 61 years
S/o Chellappan, (Retd.Track Maintainer
Office of the Section Engineer, Permanent Way/
Southern Railway/ Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: Manjadi Roadarikathu Veedu
Parasuvaickal P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram-695 508 - Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, SPC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 5
O.A.No.537 of 2017
Johnson R, Aged 62 years
S/o Rajayyan, (Retd.Track Maintainer
Office of the Section Engineer, Permanent Way/
Southern Railway/ Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: "Cheeni Vilai Veedu"
Arasakulam, Thengaipattinam P.O.
Kanyakumari Dt. - 629 173. - Applicant
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Thomas Mathew Nellimoottil, SPC]
O.A.No.638 of 2017
CHARLES. M, Aged 61 years, S/o: Madhavadian, (Retd.
Track Maintainer,Kulithurai, Office of the Section Engineer
Permanent Way/ Southern Railway /
Thiruvananthapuram), Residing at: "ORU PANAI NINTRA
VILAI", Poottety P.O., Vilavancode Taluk
Kanyakumari District-629 157. - Applicant
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 6
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mrs.O.M.Shalina, SCGSC]
O.A.No.666 of 2017
1. KRISHNA PRASAD M, Aged 60 years
S/o Madhavan Pillai, (Retd. Track Maintainer Gr. IV,
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way/Southern
Railway/ Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: Kaithapram, Ayacode
Cheruppalur, Kanyakumari District-629 161.
2. ANPAIAH M, Aged 60 years
S/o E. Masilamony, (Track Maintainer
Gr.IV., Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way/ Southern Railway/
Thiruvananthapuram). Residing at:
Pandaravilai Veedu, Maruthancode P.O.,
Kanyakumari District - 629 163.
3. VARGHESE P, Aged 60 years, S/o Ponnian
(Retd. Track Maintainer Gr.IV, Office of the
Senior Section Engineer, Permanent Way /
Southern Railway/ Thiruvananthapuram), Residing at:
Nellivilayil Veedu, Mudichel P.O.,
Kanyakumari District - 629 163.
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 7
4. MUTHIAN G, Aged 59 years,
S/o K. Gopala Nadar, (Track Maintainer Gr.IV
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Southern Railway/
Thiruvananthapuram), Residing at:
Naduthala Vilai Veedu, Vanniyur P.O.,
Kanyakumari District-629 163.
5. MARIA DHAS. S, Aged 58 years
S/o Stansilas, (Track Maintainer Gr.IV
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way/ Southern Railway/
Thiruvananthapuran), Residing at:
No: 4/123, Udaiyar Vilai, Kattuvilai,Colachel P.O.,
Kanyakumari District - 629 251. - Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mrs.O.M.Shalina, SCGSC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 8
O.A.No.407 of 2017
1. D. KASPER., Aged 56 years
S/o Daveedu, Track Maintainer Gr.II
(ERANIEL R S PO), Southern Railway
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way/ Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: Indira Street, Mele Peruvilai
Asaripallam, Kanyakumari District- 629 201.
2. M. Sankaran, Aged 56 years
S/o Mayandi, Track Maintainer Gr.II
Southern Railway, Nagercoil Town R.S.
Residing at: Kalikamanainar Theru
Palayamkottai, Thirunelveli - 627 002. - Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mrs.O.M.Shalina, SCGSC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 9
O.A.No.642 of 2017
1. SELVARAJAN P, Aged 60 years,
S/o Paramananthan J, (Retd. Track Maintainer
Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way / Alappuzha)
Residing at: Door No: 221, Ganapathy Nagar
West Street, Kottar P.O., Nagercoil 629 002.
2. VIJAYAN G, Aged 60 years
S/o Ganapathy Asari
(Retd. Sweeper, Office of the
Senior Section Engineer
Works/Thiruvananthapuram)
Residing at: "THAKKAVEEDU VILAI"
Puthen Veedu, Pacode P.O.
Kanyakumari District - 629 168. - Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mrs.O.M.Shalina, SCGSC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 10
O.A.No.44 of 2017
1. Chelliah. K, Aged 60 years, S/o Kuttinadar
(Retired Track Maintainer Gr.III
Southern Railway, Office of the
Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/ Nagercoil Junction)
Residing at:House No.1/A, Edayan Vilai
Kanyakumari District- 629 703.
2. T. Thangavel, Aged 60 years
S/o Thuraimani, (Retired Track Maintainer Gr.III
Southern Railway, Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/ Nagercoil Junction)
Residing at: Vellayanthope Chanthayadi P.O
Kanyakumari District- 629 703. - Applicants
[By Advocates: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy, Ms.Kala T Gopi]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Sreejith N., ACGSC]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 11
O.A.No.868 of 2019
M. Rajan, Aged 58 years
S/o (late) M. Muthuswamy Trackman Gr.I/
Southern Railway/ Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/Trivandrum Central)
Residing at: Pandarath Veedu
Paloth Konam Narivamoodu P.O.
Neyyanttinkara Taluk
Trivandrum District, PIN: 695 528 - Applicant
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy, Ms.Kala T. Gopi
Mr.Namadeva Prabhu B]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Sreejith N., ACGSC]
O.A.No.872 of 2019
1. K. Balakrishnan Nair, Aged 59 years
S/o Karunakaran Nair
Track Maintainer Gr.III/Southern Railway/
Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/Trivandrum Central)
Residing at: "USHUS", Koyiprakonam
Amachal P.O., Kattakkada, Trivandrum-695 572
Mob.No.9496588580
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 12
2. C. Devaraj, Aged 60 years, S/o J. Varghese
Retd. Track Maintainer Gr.III/Southern Railway/
Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/Trivandrum Central)
Residing at: Thazham Vila Veedu
Kudumbottu Konam, Chenkal, Vattavila P.O., Trivandrum
District, PIN: 695 532, Mob.No.9496120648
- Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy, Ms.Kala T. Gopi
Mr.Namadeva Prabhu B]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Southern Railway
Trivandrum Division, TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Sreejith N., ACGSC]
O.A.No.870 of 2019
K. Radhakrishnan, Aged 60 years, S/o Kuttan Pillai
Retd. Track Maintainer /Southern Railway/
Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/Trivandrum Central)
Residing at: Palanthode Veedu
Maruthoor, Neyyantikara P.O.
Trivandrum-695 121,Mob.No.8547864033 - Applicant
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy, Ms.Kala T. Gopi
Mr.Namadeva Prabhu B]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 13
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Sreejith N., ACGSC]
O.A.No.869 of 2019
1. U. Subbiah, Aged 59 years, S/o Ulaganathan
Track Mainainer Gr.III/ Gang No.6
Parassala/Southern Railway/Office of the
Senior Section Engineer/ Permanent Way/
Trivandrum Central, Permanent Address:
Valarakuzhi, Kuttu Vilai, Kuzhithurai Post
Kanyakumari District, PIN: 629 163
2. N. Tharmaraj, Aged 59 years, S/o K. Nadan
Track Maintainer Gr.III/Trolley Man/Kuzhithurai
Southern Railway/ Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/Trivandrum Central
Residing at: Kaliyan Tmhottam
Viricode P.O., Marthandam, Kanyakumari District
PIN: 629 165
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 14
3. J. Vincent, Aged 58 years, S/o Jacob
Track Maintainer Gr.III/Gang No.6/
Parassala/Southern Railway/
Office of the Senior Section Engineer/
Permanent Way/Trivandrum Central
Residing at: Kuzhivilai Veedu
Kannacode, Marthandam P.O.
Kanyakumari District, PIN: 629 165 - Applicants
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy, Ms.Kala T. Gopi
Mr.Namadeva Prabhu B]
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Sreejith N, ACGSC]
O.A.No.890 of 2019
K.Vijayakumar, Aged 57 years, S/o: Kunjikrishna Pillai.
Track Maintainer,Office of the Senior Section Engineer
Permanent Way/Southern Railway/
Thiruvananthapuram, Residing at: Qr.No.94-D
Anbar Railway colony, Poojapura P.O.,
Thiruvananthapuram 695 014 ,Ph:9567601026.
- Applicant
[By Advocate: Mr. T.C.Govindaswamy]
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 15
Versus
1. Union of India Represented by the
General Manager, Southern Railway
Headquarters Office, Park Town - P.O.
CHENNAI-600 003.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014.
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer
Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division
TRIVANDRUM-695 014. - Respondents
[By Advocate : Mr. Sreejith N, ACGSC]
The applications having been heard on 23.01.2023, the Tribunal
on 15.02.2023 passed the following:
COMMON ORDER
As common questions are involved and since the respondents are the same, all these applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order.
2. The commonality of these Original Applications is that all these applicants were Project Casual Labourers in the Railways, during the period 1979-1981. Later, they were retrenched from service. But in the decision in Inder Pal Yadav and Others v. Union of India [(1985) 2 SCC 648] the Hon'ble Supreme Court approved a scheme for the absorption of such retrenched casual labourers in Group-D service and thus a list of retrenched casual labourers were prepared by the Southern O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 16 Railway. The applicants claim that by virue of the length of service rendered by them as casual labourers, they were entitled to be absorbed in service in Group-D posts. Some of them, who were called for verification of records when appeared before the respondents, were not absorbed owing to the reason that they had crossed the upper age limit. Thus their request for absorption was rejected. Then they approached this Tribunal and obtained favourable orders, which were confirmed by the Hon'ble High Court and the Hon'ble Apex Court. Thereafter, they were absorbed in service. Later, date of absorption became the subject matter of dispute. One Viswanathan, who was sl.No.2134 in the combined list had only 601 days of service, was absorbed from 1996. Then some of the absorbed casual labourers who were seniors to him, approached this Tribunal and the Tribunal upheld their contention stating that they being seniors to Viswanathan also should have been absorbed on prior dates. When such cases were taken up, Railway contended that in the case of Viswanathan they committed some mistake; in fact Viswanathan should have been absorbed only from 03.11.2003, but happened to be given absorption with effect from 1996; so they argued that the benefit of such mistake cannot be extended to other persons. However, taking cue from the submission that Viswanathan should have been absorbed from 03.11.2003, benefit was granted by the Tribunal O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 17 granting absorption to such casual labourers who had put in more length of service from 03.11.2003. Similarly, one Malgan, who was sl.No.2225 in the consolidated list had only 522 days of service, approached this Tribunal who also was directed to be absorbed from 2003. On the basis of absorption given to Viswanathan and Malgan, a flood of O.A.s were filed before this Tribunal and the Tribunal allowed such applicants to be absorbed from 03.11.2003. These are the background facts.
3. Now the crux of the claim of these applicants is that they should have been given absorption from 03.11.2003, absorption given to them on subsequent point of time is illegal and thus they claim all service benefits from the date of absorption on 03.11.2003.
4. It is also worth mentioning that for most of the applicants, this is the second or third round of litigation. All of them had appeared before the respondents in 2003, pursuant to the call, for verification of records as their names had appeared in the Live Register, but some of them were rejected owing to the reason that they had crossed the upper age limit. That was challenged before this Tribunal and this Tribunal, by common order dated 14.03.2007, ruled that the order of the Railway Board dated 20.09.2001 fixing an upper age limit was extraneous to Inder Pal Yadav's case, quoted supra, is null and void and that stipulation of upper age was done away with. This order was challenged before the Hon'ble High Court. The High Court confirmed the order which was O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 18 upheld by the Apex Court also. Thus many of these applicants are approaching the Tribunal for the second time. Earlier, they had challenged the stand of the respondents in rejecting their claim owing to the reason that they had crossed the age limit and then obeying the directions of the Tribunal, they were absorbed. But on a subsequent point of time, citing the instances of Viswanathan and Malgan they represented before the respondents that they should be given absorption from 03.11.2003, that was rejected and that was how they have approached the Tribunal again. A very few applicants have moved the Tribunal for the first time. They had no problem of crossing age at the time of the document verification. But they also wanted antedating the date of absorption from 03.11.2003. Thus here two different categories of employees have approached the Tribunal but the nature of reliefs sought against the respondents are one and the same, that is they want a declaration that refusal on the part of the respondents to grant the applicants benefit of absorption on par with the applicants in earlier cases to be more specific in O.A. 674/2008 and O.A.784/2012, who were borne in the list of retrenched casual labourers atleast with effect from 03.11.2003, is arbitrary, discriminatory, contrary to law and hence unconstitutional. Secondly, they want a direction to the respondents to grant the applicants the benefit of absorption as Trackmen from the date O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 19 of such absorption of the applicants in the above O.A.s and direct further to grant all consequential benefits arising therefrom, including monthly pension and all other retirement benefits, as if the applicants are covered under the pre-01.01.2004 Pension Rules.
5. Before considering the contentions raised by the respondents, who are common in all the cases, it is appropriate to give a short picture of the respective claims.
(i) O.A.700/2017 - Here there is only one applicant, who claims that he was sl.No.2831 in the Live Register, he has retired from service on 31.03.2016 and his date of absorption was on 13.05.2010. He had obtained absorption on the basis of the orders granted in O.A.674/2008.
(ii) O.A.690/2017 - There are seven applicants in this Original Application. All of them have retired from service between the period from 31.05.2014 to 30.06.2016. They also were granted absorption on the basis of orders passed in O.A.271/2006 and O.A.352/2006. They claim that their length of service is above 600 days and are entitled to get benefits granted to Viswanathan and Malgan.
(iii) O.A. 529/2017 - There are 2 applicants, both of them have retired from service on 30.11.2016; they were absorbed on 15.07.2008.
They claim that they had put in about 500 days of service and had obtained absorption by virtue of the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 20 O.A.793/2005.
(iv) O.A.537/2017 - The sole applicant claims that he had about 600 days of service, that he was absorbed on 19.12.2008 and retired from service on 31.10.2014 after putting in about six years service; he had obtained absorption on the basis of the order obtained in O.A.785/2007.
(v) O.A.638/2017 - The sole applicant claims that he had more than 525 days of service before absorption, that he was absorbed on 10.05.2010 and retired on 30.04.2016, he got only nearly 6 years of service. According to him, he obtained order of absorption by virtue of the order in O.A.495/2008.
(vi) O.A.666/2017 - There are five applicants in this Original Application, who claimed that they had put in more than 600 days of service as casual labour; the first three applicants have already retired from service from 31.12.2016, 31.05.2017 and 31.05.2017 respectively, whereas at the time of filing the application, applicant nos.4 and 5 were working. They claim that they had more than 600 days of service as casual labourers and that they got absorption as Group-D employees on the basis of the order in O.A.271/2006.
(vii) O.A. 407/2017 - Both of the applicants claim that they had put in 828 days of service before absorption, both of them were absorbed on O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 21 11.10.2004 and are continuing in employment. They had no occasion to move this Tribunal seeking absorption.
(viii) O.A.642/2017 - Both the applicants claim that they had put in more than 650 days of service as casual labourers before absorption; both of them have retired from service on 30.04.2017, they were absorbed on 21.01.2010 and 25.09.2009 respectively, that they got absorption by virtue of the orders on O.A.739/2009 and O.A.271/2006 respectively.
(ix) O.A.44/2017 - Both the applicants have retired from service on 31.10.2016 and 30.04.2016 respectively and got appointment on the strength of the orders on O.A.603/2008 and O.A.352/2006. It is claimed that both of them were absorbed on 23.10.2009 on the strength of the order of the Tribunal.
(x) O.A.870/2019 - The sole applicant claims that when his claim was rejected on the ground of over age, he moved this Tribunal with O.A.613/2006 and got appointment with effect from 05.09.2008 and retired from service on31.12.2018.
(xi) O.A.872/2019 - It has come out that both the applicants were called for verification of documents as their names fell between sl.No.1878 and 2190. Both of them are still in service, but they were got absorption only from 05.01.2009 on the basis of the orders passed by this O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 22 Tribunal in O.A.179/2004 and O.A.451/2007 respectively. Later, they approached this Tribunal seeking the benefit of absorption given to Viswanathan and Malgan, who are far juniors to them, by virtue of the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A.721/2018, they moved representations which were not yet considered and that is why they have approached this Tribunal again, third time, seeking absorption with effect from 03.11.2003 and consequential benefits.
(xii) O.A.868/2019 - The sole applicant claims that he had length of service of 650 days before absorption on 12.01.2004. He was in service when the application was filed. He claims that he got absorption on the strength of the order passed by this Tribunal in O.A.720/2018
(xiii) O.A.869/2019 - There are three applicants. All of them are still in service. They were granted absorption from 11.10.2004 and later they wanted the date of absorption to be antedated. When their representations were not considered, they approached the Tribunal with O.A.743/2018 and the Tribunal directed the respondents to pass orders within a month. By Annexures-A8 to A10 orders, their representations were rejected and that prompted them to approach the Tribunal again.
(xiv) O.A.890/2019 - The sole applicant is still in service. He was absorbed on 08.09.2008. He wants the date of absorption to be advanced to 03.11.2003.
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 23
6. In all these cases the respondents have filed detailed reply. All possible contentions have been raised by them opposing the O.A.s. I think it is not necessary to deal with all the replies separately. But the common line is that they contend that most of the applications are barred by constructive res-judicata. The point is that all these applicants had approached this Tribunal earlier and obtained absorption on the strength of the orders passed by the Tribunal and at that time they had no contention that they should be given absorption from 03.11.2003 and therefore, this is a ground 'might and ought' to have been raised in the earlier proceedings and now they cannot re-agitate the very same contention again and therefore such applications are barred by constructive res-judicata.
7. Certainly, in most of the cases it is stated that the applications are barred by limitation under Section 21 of the Administrate Tribunals Act. They were absorbed much ahead and now there is no point in approaching the Tribunal after long lapse of time and if such a tendency is not discouraged that would have far reaching consequences and therefore, the applications are sought to be dismissed on that ground also.
8. It was also contended in some replies that it was specifically ordered when the applicants were absorbed, that they cannot raise any dispute regarding inter-se seniority. Therefore, the applicants are O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 24 estopped from contending that they are entitled to get seniority over Viswanathan and Malgan. Therefore, all the applications are sought to be dismissed.
9. I heard the learned counsel for the applicants as well as the learned Standing Counsel, in detail. They have reiterated the respective contentions. The learned counsel for the applicants has taken to me the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and others v. Munshi Ram [2022 Live Law (SC) 891] besides two recent orders of a co- ordinate Bench of this Tribunal dated 29.10.2022 in O.A.609/2020 and order dated 20.10.2022 in O.A.424/2018 and contended that the applicants are entitled to get the very same treatment irrespective of the question whether they were juniors or seniors to Viswanathan or Malgan. According to the learned counsel, the fact that the applicants were called for verification of documents in 2003 is not in dispute. In other words, they were Project Casual Laboures during 1979-1981 and their names were included in the live register prepared by the Southern Railway on the basis of the directions of the Supreme Court and therefore, they are entitled to get the very same reliefs as granted by the Hon'ble High Court in OP(CAT)138/2014 etc. dated 21.12.2016. According to the learned counsel, this decision has been upheld by the Supreme Court, in subsequent decisions also the High Court has O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 25 reiterated and granted reliefs to the similarly placed employees who were in the Live Register and who were called for appointment on regular basis. Therefore, according to the learned counsel, all of them are entitled to get the date of absorption antedated to 03.11.2003.
10. Learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents opposed the claim and said that the applications are barred under constructive res-judicata, limitation etc and the applicants are not entitled to get any relief.
11. In the nature of the contentions raised by the parties, it seems that it is not necessary to set out the sequence of events starting from Inderpal Yadav case, where admittedly, the Hon'ble Supreme Court had directed the Railways to absorb them in future vacancies of Group-D employees from the list of Project Casual Labourers who had put in more than 360 days as on 01.01.1981. Accordingly, the Southern Railway had prepared a consolidated list and names of all these applicants found place in the list. Even though an argument was raised that some of the applicants were raw juniors, such a consideration does not arise because it is the admitted position that all the applicants, who were retrenched from service, were in the list of casual labourers prepared by the Southern Railway. Thus all the applicants were in the list and were called for verification of records in 2003 as stipulated by the Railways. O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 26
12. After Inderpal Yadav, the Railway had issued a letter on 20.09.2001 stipulating that a person who had exceeded the prescribed age is not entitled to be absorbed. That decision was challenged before this Tribunal and the matter reached before this Tribunal for consideration in O.A.271/2006 etc. The Tribunal by detailed order dated 14.03.2007 rejected the claim and said that the letter dated 20.09.2001 is ultravires the directions of the Supreme Court, and quashed the same. Thus it directed the respondents to consider the case of over aged casual labourers as well whose names had appeared in the list. By the time few years had lapsed. Contending that such a predicament was created by the respondents, some of the employees wanted to antedate their date of absorption. That was allowed by the Tribunal. While implementing that order, one Viswanathan was granted notional absorption from 1996. Later, taking benefit of such relief some of the fellow casual labourers also approached this Tribunal and claimed the benefit of advancing the date of absorption. The Railways took the stand that it was by mistake that Viswanathan was granted the date of absorption from 1996, that he was actually entitled to get absorption only from 03.11.2003. Taking cue from the averments of the respondents, this Tribunal directed those applicants to be absorbed with effect from 03.11.2003. Later, one Malgan also approached this Tribunal., who was lower in the list than O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 27 Viswanathan and had put in only 522 days as casual labourer. He was also granted an order directing to be absorbed with effect from 03.11.2003.
13. These orders opened a flood of Original Applications and many of them who were either senior or junior to Malgan and Viswanathan approached the Tribunal seeking the date of absorption on 03.11.2003.
14. As stated earlier, all these applicants were included in the live register prepared by the Railways consequent to the directions issued by the Supreme Court in Inderpal Yadav. The only stipulation given by the Apex Court was that the Project Casual Labourer should have 360 days of casual labour service to his credit. The Tribunal rejected the stipulation regarding the upper age limit on the date of consideration of their claim. The High Court and Supreme Court upheld the directions of this Tribunal. Now it seems that, after series of orders it has become clear that those who were called for verification of records in 2003 are entitled to get absorption on notional basis from 03.11.2003 onwards. Even recently also, as stated earlier, a Bench of this Tribunal in O.A.609/2020 and 424/2018 granted similar directions to employees similarly placed who were casual labourers who were given absorption and were given notional absorption with effect from 03.11.2003. O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 28
15. At the risk of repetition it is to be stated that the claim of the applicants that they were retrenched casual labourers, that they were called for records verification in 2003 is not disputed by the respondents.
16. The question whether these claims are barred by limitation was considered by the Hon'ble High Court in the common order dated 21.12.2016, Annexure-A5 in O.A.700/2017. The High Court held that the delay had occurred 'only because of the wrong course of action pursued by the Railways leading to different rounds of litigation'. The Court was of the view that no premium can be extended to such wrong doer. It added that, 'in the instant case, the mischief was done by the Railways and nobody else. The plea of 'limitation' has been rightly turned down by the Tribunal and the Court does not require any second thought to hold against the Railways'.
17. Again, regarding the plea of limitation, the Hon'ble High Court in OP(CAT) 288/2017, that is Annexure-A7 in O.A.868/2019 etc, held that 'plea of limitation is not available because of the question of law was declared by the High Court as per the common judgment dated 21.12.2016, and then only the picture became clear, that even otherwise the benefit has been restricted to have date of regularisation notionally reckoned only with effect from 03.11.2003 without granting any consequential monetary benefits, except for the purpose of pension, it O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 29 was quite a continuing cause of action'. So the High Court also rejected their plea of bar under limitation.
18. There is no substance in the argument on constructive res- judicata also. Many of these applicants moved again after their representations for antedating the date of absorption were denied by the respondents. Earlier they had approached this Tribunal for the purpose of getting them absorbed. At that time, their claim for appointment on regular basis stood rejected on the ground of exceeding age limit. That was found illegal and thus they were granted absorption with a future date only. At that time, this question of granting them absorption from a particular date was not a contentious issue; there was no cause of action for them to claim such a date and therefore, there is no bar under constructive res-judicata also.
19. Ofcourse, the applicants have claimed that they are entitled to get all the benefits from 03.11.2003 onwards including salary arrears. But the High Court has restricted benefits, for reckoning 'qualifying service' for pension, on a notional basis and never for payment of any monetary benefits or such other reliefs.
20. In other words, the applicants who were since absorbed by the Railways have to be granted absorption with effect from 03.11.2003; however, limiting their eligibility for pension only without granting any of O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 30 the relief, it is the law declared by the High Court which has become final. It is the settled law that the benefit of it should be extended to all similarly situated persons, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Aswini Kumar and others v. State of Bihar and others [(1997) 2 SCC 1]. There is no reason why the same benefit shall not be given to the applicants as well.
21. In the result, the date of absorption of all the applicants shall be antedated to 03.11.2003. However, as held by the Hon'ble High Court, such date of regularisation will be only for the purpose of reckoning the qualifying service for determining the eligibility for getting pension under the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and will not result in payment of any arrears or any other monetary benefits either towards salary or pension or such other heads. It goes without saying that the actual pension and terminal benefits payable will depend upon the actual salary drawn by the applicants at the relevant time.
All the applications are allowed to the above extent. No cost.
(Dated, this the 15th February, 2023.) JUSTICE K. HARIPAL JUDICIAL MEMBER ds O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 31 List of Annexures O.A.No.700 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order bearing No. 56/ 2010/ WP dated 13.05.2010 issued in the favour of the applicant by the third Respondent.
Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No. 674/2008 dated 01.10.2009, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal.. Annexure A4: True copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A5: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A6: True copy of representation submitted by the applicant dated 18.06.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent. Annexure-R1:- True extract of the Merged Seniority list showing position of the applicant.
O.A.No.690 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order dated 14.03.2007 in O.A No. 271/2006 and connected cases.
Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A5: True copy of representation submitted by the applicants dated 21.02.2017, addressed to the 3 respondent. O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 32 Annexure-R1:- True copy of Railway Board's Order RBE No.225/2003 dated 31/12/2003.
Annexure-R2:- True copy of the Office Order No.124/2009/WP dated 25-09- 2009 O.A.No.529 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order bearing No.133/2008/WP dated 15.07.2008 issued in favour of the 2nd applicant by the third Respondent Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A5: True copy of representation submitted by the applicants dated 28.03.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent. Annexure-R1:- True copy of the Notifications in 'Mathrubhumi' (Malayalam) and 'The Hindu' (English) Newspapers. Annexure-R3:- True extract of the Merged Seniority list showing the position of the applicants O.A.No.537 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order bearing No.V/P 407/I/ECL/Vol.
XI(Pt.4) dated 19.12.2008 issued by the third Respondent Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 33 Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A5: True copy of representation submitted by the applicants dated 2.12.2014, addressed to the 3rd respondent. Annexure-R1:- True copy of the O.O.No.224/2008/WP dated 19.12.2008.
Annexure-R2: True copy of the O.O. No.56/2010/WP dated 13.5.2010. Annexure-R3:- True copy of letter No.V/P.407/I/ECL/Vol.X dated 24/03/2003.
Annexure-R4:- True copy of letter No.V/P.407/1/ECL/Vol.X dated 28-3- 2003.
Annexure-R5:- True copy of letter No.V/P.407/1/ECL/Vol.X dated 26.6.03.
Annexure-R6:- True copy of the Notifications in 'Mathrubhumi' (Malayalam) and 'The Hindu' (English) Newspapers. Annexure-R7:- True copy of letter No.V/P.407/1/ECL/Vol.X dated 10-08- 2004.
Annexure-R8:- True copy of letter No.V/P.407/1/ECL/Vol.XI dated 23.10.2006.
O.A.No.638 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order bearing No.V/P407/I/ECL/vol. XI (Pilot-1) dated 10.05.2010 issued by the third Respondent Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 34 Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in C.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A5: True copy of representation submitted by the applicant dated 26.06.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent. Annexure-R1: True copy of the typed casual labour cards of the applicant O.A.No.666 of 2017 Annexure-Al: True copy of the order bearing No.146/2008/WP dated 04.08.2008 issued in favour of the 1st and 5th applicants, by the third Respondent Annexure-A2: True copy of the order bearing No. 163/2008/WP dated 27.08.2008, issued by the third respondent as regards the 2nd and 3rd applicants.
Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A4: True copy of the order in O.A.No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A5: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016.
Annexure-A6: True copy of representation submitted by the applicants dated 05.02.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent. O.A.No.407 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the Office Order bearing No:120/2004/WP dated 11.10.2004 issued on behalf of the 3rd Respondent.
Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 35 Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No.138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A5: True copy of representation submitted by the 1st applicant dated 28.03.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent.
Annexure-A6: True copy of representation submitted by the 2nd applicant dated 28.03.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent.
Annexure-R1:- True extract of the Notification No.V/P.407/I/ECL/Vol.X dated 03.07.2003 published in 'Mathrubhumi' and 'The Hindu' Newspapers dated 17/7/2003 and 15/7/2003 respectively.
Annexure-R2: True copy of the Medical Certificates dated 01.09.2004 issued in favour of the applicants.
Annexure-R3:- True copy of the Merged Seniority list showing position of the applicants O.A.No.642 of 2017 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order bearing No.8/2009/WP dated 21.01.2010 issued in favour of the 1st applicant by the third Respondent.
Annexure-Al(a): True copy of the order No: 124/2009/WP dated 25.09.2009, issued by the third respondent as regards the second applicant.
Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 36 Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in OP (CAT) No. 138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure-A5: True copy of representation submitted by the first applicant dated 21.05.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent.
Annexure-A6: True copy of representation submitted by the second applicant dated 21.05.2017, addressed to the 3rd respondent.
Annexure-R1:- True copy of the Order in OA 739/2009 dated 7th January 2010.
Annexure-R2:- True copy of the Office Order No.08/2009/WP dated 21-01-2010 Annexure-R3:- True copy of the O.O.No.133/208/WP dated 15-07- 2008.
O.A.No.44 of 2017 Annexure A1: True copy of the order bearing No.V/P. 407/I/I/ECL/Vol.XI (Pilot 6) dated 23.10.2009, issued 7 from the office of the 3rd respondent.
Annexure A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure A3: A true copy of the order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure A4: True copy of representation submitted by the applicant dated 15.11.2016, addressed to the 3rd respondent. Annexure A5: True copy of representation submitted by the applicant dated and 07.06.2016, addressed to the 3rd respondent.
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 37O.A.No.868 of 2019 Annexure A1: True copy of Office Order bearing No.2/2004/WP dated 12.01.2004, issued from theoffice of the 3rd respondent Annexure A2: True copy of order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31 July 2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure A3: True copy of representation dated 21.07.2018 submitted to the 3rd respondent Annexure A4: True copy of order bearing No.V/P.407/I/CL/Engg/Court Cases dated 20.03.2018, issued by the 3rd respondent. Annexure A5: A true copy of the Order in OA No. 180/720/2018, dated 31.08.2018 Annexure A6: Order bearing No. V/P.407/I/CL/ Court Cases, dated 13.06.2019, issued by the 3rd respondent Annexure A7: A true copy of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, in OP(CAT) No.288/2017 dated 16.11.2017 O.A.No.872 of 2019 Annexure-A1: A true copy of letter bearing No.V/P.407/I/ ECL/Vol.X dated 24.03.2003.
Annexure-A2: A true copy of order dated 31.07.2012 in OA No.1032/2011 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
Annexure-A3: A true copy of the representation dated 02.07.2018 submitted by the first applicant.
Annexure-A4: A true copy of the representation dated 02.07.2018 submitted by the second applicant Annexure-A5: True copy of Order bearing No.V/P.407/I/ CL/Engg/Court Cases dated 20.03.2018.
Annexure-A6: A true copy of order dated 31.08.2018 in OA No.721 of 2018 of this Hon'ble Tribunal.
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 38Annexure-A7: True copy of Order bearing No.V/P.407/I/ CL/Court Cases dated 10.05.2019 issued to the first applicant. Annexure-A8: True copy of Order bearing No.V/P.407/I/ CL/Court Cases dated 10.05.2019 issued to the second applicant Annexure-A9: A true copy of judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, dated 16.11.2017 in OP(CAT) No.288/2017 Annexure-R1:- True copy of O.O. No. 05/2009/WP dated 05.01.2009. Annexure-R2: True copy of the relevant pages of this Hon'ble Tribunal's common order dated 14.03.2007.
Annexure-R3:- True copy of this Hon'ble Tribunal's order in O.A. No. 451/2007 dated 18.02.2008.
Annexure-R4:- True copy of the relevant portion of the order in Writ-A No. 1006 of 2016 dated 04.02.2016 before the Hon'ble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad.
Annexure-R5:- True copy of the order in OA No. 050/00600/2017 dated 24.05.2018 before the Hon'ble C.A.T., Patna Bench. O.A.No.870 of 2019 Annexure A1: A true copy of the Office Order bearing no. 171/2008/ WP 05.09.2008 issued by the third respondent. Annexure A2: True of order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31 July 2012 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure A3: True copy of representation dated 02.07.2018, addressed to the 3rd respondent Annexure A4: True copy of order bearing No.V/P.407/I/CL/Engg/Court Cases dated 20.03.2018 issued by the 3rd respondent Annexure A5: A true copy of the Order in OA No. 180/716/2018, dated 30.08.2018 O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 39 Annexure A6: A true copy of the order bearing No.V/P.407/I/CL/ Court Cases, dated 13.06.2019, issued by the 3rd respondent Annexure A7: A true copy of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, in OP(CAT) No.288/2017 Annexure-R1: True copy of the order in OA No. 050/00600/2017 dated 24.05.2018 before the Hon'ble C.A.T., Patna Bench. Annexure-R2:- True copy of the relevant pages of this Hon'ble Tribunal's common order dated 14.03.2007.
O.A.No.869 of 2019 Annexure A1: True copy of Office order bearing No.120/2004/WP dated 11.10.2004, issued by the 3rd respondent. Annexure A2: True copy of order dated 31.07.2012 in OA No.1032/2011 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure A3: True copy of order in O.A No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure A4: True copy of judgments in OP No.(CAT)138/2014 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 rendered by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala.
Annexure A5: True copy of Memorandum bearing No.V/P.407/I/CL/ Engg./Court Cases dated 20.03.2018, issued by the 3rd respondent Annexure A6 series: True copies of representations dated 20.06.2018 submitted by the applicants to the 3rd respondent. Annexure A7: A true copy of the Order in OA No. 180/743/2018, dated 07.09.2018 is produced herewith and marked as Annexure A8: Order bearing No. V/P.407/I/CL/ Court Cases, dated 13.06.2019, issued by the 3rd respondent to the 1st applicant.
O.A Nos.700/2017 and conn.cases 40Annexure A9: Order bearing No. V/P.407/I/CL/ Court Cases, dated 13.06.2019, issued by the 3rd respondent to the 2nd applicant.
Annexure A10: Order bearing No. V/P.407/I/CL/ Court Cases, dated 14.06.2019, issued by the 3rd respondent to the 3rd applicant Annexure A11: A true copy of the judgment of Hon'ble High Court of Kerala, in OP(CAT) No.288/2017, dated 16.11.2017 O.A.No.890 of 2019 Annexure-A1: True copy of the order V/P 407/1/ECL/Vol.XI(Pt.2) dated 08.09.2008 Annexure-A2: True copy of the order in OA No.1032/2011 dated 31.07.2012, rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal. Annexure-A3: True copy of the order in O.A. No.784/2012 dated 10.02.2015 rendered by this Hon'ble Tribunal Annexure-A4: True copy of the judgment in and OP(CAT)138/2014 and WP(C) 23757 of 2010 and connected cases dated 21.12.2016 Annexure A5: A true copy of the Order bearing No.V/P/407/I/CL/ Engg. Court cases dated 20.03.2018 Annexure-A6: True copy of representation submitted by the applicant dated 02.12.2018 Annexure-R1:- True copy of the order in OA No. 050/00600/2017 dated 24.05.2018 before the Hon'ble C.A.T., Patna Bench. Annexure-R2: True copy of the relevant pages of this Hon'ble Tribunal's common order dated 14.03.2007.