Smt. Shashikala Wd/O. Prabhakarrao Naik v. Union Of India, Mumbai, Through General Manager, Central Railway And Others

1606wp6648.15 1/2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY

NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR WRIT PETITION NO. 6648 OF 2015 (Smt. Shashikala wd/o Prabhakarrao Naik vs. Union of India and others) __________________________________________________________________ Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders.

CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI AND KUM. INDIRA JAIN, JJ.

DATED : JUNE 16, 2016 Heard Adv. Bambal for petitioner and Adv. Suekhani holding for Adv. R.G. Agrawal for respondents.

Perused judgment delivered by Central Administrative Tribunal. Central Administrative Tribunal in paragraphs 17 and 18 has found that as per policy decision dated 12/7/1989 relied upon by the petitioner, there was no regularisation of casual labourers , but their engagement only was accepted. Before this Court, petitioner widow has raised specific ground vide paragraph 17(III) that as per list of employees supplied to her, employees regularised were junior and had completed less number of working days than her husband. This ground has not been specifically denied by the respondents.

Adv. Bambal fairly submits that such list

1606wp6648.15 2/2 was not produced for perusal of Central Administrative Tribunal.

If this is correct and employees junior to deceased husband of petitioner were regularised, interpretation of Central Administrative Tribunal on policy decision may not be correct.

Considering the fact that widow of deceased employee is fighting for pension and other terminal benefits, we find it appropriate to grant her liberty to file necessary application with all relevant documents seeking review of the judgment.

Hence, with liberty to file appropriate application before Central Administrative Tribunal, we dispose of the writ petition. Needless to mention that all rival contentions are kept open.

JUDGE JUDGE khj