Payment of Arrears w.e.f. 01-01-1996 to 18-02-2003 to Railway Accounts Officer: Supreme Court dismissed the Review Petition

Payment of Arrears w.e.f. 01-01-1996 to 18-02-2003 to Railway Accounts Officer: Supreme Court dismissed the Review Petition

SUPREME COURT DISMISSED THE REVIEW PETITION ON PAYMENT OF ARREARS W.E.F. 01-01-1996 TO 18-02-2003 to RAILWAY ACCOUNTS OFFICER

Text reproduced of Court Order:-

CHAMBER MATTER

SECTION XIA

SUPREME  COURT  OF  INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

REVIEW PETITION (C) NO(s). 1494 OF 2013 IN SLP(C) 9832/2013

U.O.I. & ORS.

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

JOSE SEBASTIAN & ORS.

Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for stay,c/delay in filing review petition)

Date: 01/08/2013  This Petition was circulated today.

CORAM :
HON’BLE  THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR

By Circulation

UPON perusing papers the Court made the following ORDER

Application for hearing in open Court is rejected.
Delay condoned.
The review petition is dismissed in  terms  of  the  signed order.

[Madhu Bala]         [Savita Sainani]
Sr.PA                         Court Master
(Signed order is placed on the file)

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

2.     REVIEW PETITION (Civil) No. 1494 OF 2013

IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (C) No. 9832  OF 2013

Union of India & Ors

…. Petitioner(s)

Versus

Jose Sebastian & Ors

….  Respondent(s)

ORDER

Application for hearing in open Court is rejected.

Delay condoned.

We have carefully gone through the review petition  and  the connected papers.  We find no merit in the  review  petition  and  the same  is accordingly dismissed.

………………………………CJI.

(P. SATHASIVAM)

…………………………………J.

(JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR)

NEW DELHI;
AUGUST 01, 2013

Source: http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/rc%20149413p.txt

*******

Special Leave Petition (Civil) 9832 OF 2013 Order & Judgement:

ITEM NO.25 COURT NO.2 SECTION XIA

SUPREME   COURT   OF   INDIA
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)……/2013
CC 1997/2013

(From the judgement and order  dated 27/03/2012 in WPC No.22276/2007 of  The
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM)

UNION OF INDIA & ORS

Petitioner(s)

VERSUS

JOSE SEBASTIAN & ORS

Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)

Date: 25/02/2013  This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE P. SATHASIVAM
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR

For Petitioner(s)       Ms. Manita Verma,Adv.
Ms. Sukhbeer Kaur Bajwa,Adv.
Mr. Shreekant N. Terdal,Adv.

For Respondent(s)       Ms. Sumita Hazarika,Adv.
Mr. Ezekial Jarain,Adv.

UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following ORDER

Heard learned  counsel  for  the  parties  and  perused  the relevant material.
Delay condoned.
We do not find any legal and valid ground for  interference.
The special leave petition is dismissed.

[Madhu Bala]         [Savita Sainani]
Sr.PA                         Court Master

Source: http://courtnic.nic.in/supremecourt/temp/pc%20199713p.txt

*******

Judgement and order dated 27/03/2012 in WPC No.22276/2007 of The HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM:

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE THOTTATHIL  B.RADHAKRISHNAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR

TUESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2012/7TH CHAITHRA 1934

WP(C).No. 22276 of 2007 (Z)
OA.671/2003 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED
30.06.2006

PETITIONER(S):

1.  UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY
THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS (RAILWAY BOARD), RAIL BHAVAN
NEW DELHI.

2.  THE GENERAL MANAGER,
SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PARK TOWN P.O., CHENNAI-600 003.

3.  THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF
INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI.

BY ADV. SRI.JAMES KURIAN, SC, RAILWAYS

RESPONDENT(S):

1.  JOSE SEBASTIAN, S/O. P.A.SEBASTIAN,
JUNIOR ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT (RETD.)
DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY
TRIVANDRUM-14, RESIDING AT KRISHNA LODGE
KANNERTHUMUKKU, TRIVANDRUM-14.

2.  SOUDAMINI HARIDAS, W/O. MR. HARIDAS,
JUNIOR ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT, DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS
OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM-14
RESIDING AT KMRA-125, KUNNATHUMUKKU, TRIVANDRUM-14.

3.  R.SHAILAJA NAIR, D/O. MR. K.N.PILLAI,
JUNIOR ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT, DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS
OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM-14
RESIDING AT ROSE COTTAGE, TC 15/882, COTTON HILL
TRIVANDRUM-10.

4.  AJITHA T.NAIR, W/O. MR. S.THULASEEDHARAN
NAIR, JUNIOR ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT
DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY
TRIVANDRUM-14, RESIDING AT UDIYANNOOR PUTHEN, VEEDU
KUTHIRAKALAM P.O., VEMBAYAM, TRIVANDRUM.
LSN

–2–

WP(C).No. 22276 of 2007 (Z)

5.  SINDHU HARIKUMAR, W/O. MR. HARIKUMAR,
JUNIOR ACCOUNTS ASSISTANT, DIVISIONAL ACCOUNTS
OFFICE, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, TRIVANDRUM-14
RESIDING AT TC 16/2429, SINDHU NIVAS, VALIYASALA
TRIVANDRUM.

6.  CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
REPRESENTED BY THE REGISTRAR
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM.

R1 TO R5 BY ADV. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY
BY ADV. SRI.P.V.ABDUL SAMAD

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL)  HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD  ON
27-03-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

LSN

WP(C).No. 22276 of 2007 (Z)

APPENDIX

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS:

P1:  COPY OF THE O.A. NO. 671/2003 WITH ANNEXURES DATED NIL.

P2:  COPY OF THE REPLY STATEMENT WITH ANNEXURE DATED 14/01/2004.

P3:  COPY OF THE REJOINDER DATED 20/02/2004.

P4:  COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT DATED 23/04/2007.

P5:  COPY OF THE ORDER O.A. NO. 671/2003 DATED 30/06/2006.

P6:  COPY OF THE ORDER IN CONTEMPT PETITION NO. 57/03 DATED 03.06.2003.

RESPONDENT’S EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE.

LSN

THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN &
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ.
—————————————-
W.P.(C)No.22276 of 2007
—————————————-

Dated this the 27th day of March, 2012

JUDGMENT

Thottathil B.Radhakrishnan, J.

The short issue is whether the respondents ,who are Railway employees, are entitled to arrear of pay on revision of scales with effect from 1.1.1996. They were refused such benefit till 18.2.2003 as per Annexure-A3.

That has been interfered with by the Tribunal. We find no rationale to refuse relief to the Railway employees particularly when such relief has been granted to the employees of the other sector covered by the Pay Commission Order.

We find no jurisdictional error or legal infirmity to say that there is any injustice against the establishment on the basis of the impugned order. No ground made out for interference under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India.

The writ petition fails and accordingly it is dismissed. No costs.

Sd/-
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN
Judge

Sd/-
C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Judge

TKS/27.3.2012

Source: http://judis.nic.in/judis_kerala/qrydisp.aspx?filename=248588