Sriwas Charan Biswal and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
EmailAppeal: Civil Appeals Nos. 1950-61 of 1997
Petitioner: Sriwas Charan Biswal and Others
Respondent: Union of India and Others
Apeal: Civil Appeals Nos. 1950-61 of 1997
Judges: S.P.BHARUCHA & K.VENKATASWAMI, JJ.
Date of Judgment: Mar 14, 1997
Head Note:
SERVICE AND LABOUR LAW
Benefit of Supreme Court Judgment. condition for availability of such benefit – Held that to get benefit of Redappa’s case the appellants must be such persons whose claim petitions had been dismissed, because the appeals filed had already been dismissed. Matter restored to CAT for fresh consideration.
Benefit of Supreme Court Judgment. condition for availability of such benefit – Held that to get benefit of Redappa’s case the appellants must be such persons whose claim petitions had been dismissed, because the appeals filed had already been dismissed. Matter restored to CAT for fresh consideration.
Cases Reffered:
Union of India v. R. Reddappa AIR 1961 SC 1570 (Para 2)
JUDGEMENT:
O R D E R
1. Leave granted
2. It was the case of the respondents before the Tribunal that none of the appellants had filed appeals. The Tribunal proceeded to consider whether the judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India v. R. Reddappa AIR 1961 SC 1570 applied to the appellants, regardless of whether or not they had filed such ap-peals. It is clear, particularly from paragraph 7 of the judgment in R. Reddappa case, that the ratio therein would apply to those cases where “the claim petitions have been dismissed be-cause the appeals filed had already been dismissed”. To get the benefit of the judgment in R. Reddappa case, therefore, the appellants must be such persons whose claim petitions had been dismissed because the appeals filed had already been dismissed and this is a matter which will require an investigation on facts.
3. The appeals are, accordingly, allowed and the order under appeal is set aside. The various original applications (OAs Nos. 248 to 254 of 1994, 265 to 267 of 1994 and 269-270 of 1994) shall be restored to the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta, for being considered afresh, having regard to the observations made above and the decision of this Court aforemen-tioned.
4. No order as to costs.
1. Leave granted
2. It was the case of the respondents before the Tribunal that none of the appellants had filed appeals. The Tribunal proceeded to consider whether the judgment of this Court in the case of Union of India v. R. Reddappa AIR 1961 SC 1570 applied to the appellants, regardless of whether or not they had filed such ap-peals. It is clear, particularly from paragraph 7 of the judgment in R. Reddappa case, that the ratio therein would apply to those cases where “the claim petitions have been dismissed be-cause the appeals filed had already been dismissed”. To get the benefit of the judgment in R. Reddappa case, therefore, the appellants must be such persons whose claim petitions had been dismissed because the appeals filed had already been dismissed and this is a matter which will require an investigation on facts.
3. The appeals are, accordingly, allowed and the order under appeal is set aside. The various original applications (OAs Nos. 248 to 254 of 1994, 265 to 267 of 1994 and 269-270 of 1994) shall be restored to the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta, for being considered afresh, having regard to the observations made above and the decision of this Court aforemen-tioned.
4. No order as to costs.
