← Library
High Court for State of TelanganaWP/43163/2017dismissed

Union Of India, Rep. By Its The General Manager, v. T.R.Rajkumr,

2017-12-26V Ramasubramanian,M.Ganga Rao2 pages

The Hon'ble Sri Justice V.RAMASUBRAMANIAN and The Hon'ble Sri Justice M. GANGA RAO + WRIT PETITION No.43163 OF 2017 Date:26.12.2017 Between:

% Union of India, Rep. by the General Manager, South Central Railway, Secunderabad and two others. ... Petitioners Vs.

$ T.R. Rajkumar S/ o.Late Ramaswamy, Aged about 60 years, Occ: Ex.Senior Section Engineer In the O/ o. the Deputy Chief Signal and Telecommunication Engineer, S & t Workshops, Mettugada, South Central Railway, Secunderabad.

... Respondent ! Counsel for Petitioner : Mrs. K. Aruna ^ Counsel for Respondents : Sri K. Siva Reddy < Gist :

> Head Note :

? Cases Referred : 2014 (8) Supreme Court Cases 883

VRS,J & MGR,J WP No.43163 of 2017 HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN AND HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE M. GANGA RAO WRIT PETITION No.43163 OF 2017 ORDER: (per V. Ramasubramanian, J) Challenging an order of re-fixation of pay and recovery, the respondent filed an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal allowed the application, forcing the Railway Administration to come up with the above writ petition.

2. Heard Mrs. K. Aruna, learned Standing Counsel for the petitioners. Mr. K. Siva Reddy, learned counsel takes notice for the respondent.

3. Though the law was in a state of flux for some time, the last of the judgments, was the one in State of Punjab v. Rafiq Masih1. The Tribunal followed the said decision and set aside the order of recovery. But, at the same time, the Tribunal ensured that the respondents will not be entitled to the benefit of the wrong fixation continuously. The respondent himself, as seen from paragraph-7 of the order of the Tribunal, restricted his prayer only to the recovery and not to the re-fixation.

4. The Tribunal having followed the latest decision of the Supreme Court cannot be said to have committed any illegality. Hence, the Writ Petition is dismissed.

5. As a sequel thereto, miscellaneous petitions, if any, pending shall stand dismissed. No order as to costs. _____________________ V. RAMASUBRAMANIAN, J _______________ M. GANGA RAO, J December 26, 2017 KTL 1 2014 (8) Supreme Court Cases 883