Union Of India And Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH Date of decision:08.12.2017 Union of India and others ... Review applicant/petitioners Vs.

Central Administrative Tribunal and others ... Respondents C.M.No.14871 of 2017 in R.A.No.469 of 2017 in CWP No.10299 of 2015 Union of India and others ... Review applicant/petitioners Vs.

Central Administrative Tribunal and others ... Respondents

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT RAWAL Present:- Mr. P.C.Goyal, Senior Panel Counsel with Ms. Aarti Goyal, Advocate for the review applicant/petitioners.

None for the respondents.

AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) 1.

This order shall dispose of two review petitions bearing Nos.469 of 2017 in CWP No.10299 of 2015 and RA No.470 of 2017 in CWP No.10300 of 2015. However, the facts are taken from RA No.470 of 2017 in CWP No.10300 of 2015.

2.

Review application No.470 of 2017 has been filed under

Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 CPC and Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking review of the order dated 19.07.2017, vide which two writ petitions bearing Nos.10299 and 10300 of 2015 have been dismissed as the common question of law and fact are involved in both the cases.

3.

Learned counsel for the review applicant/petitioners submitted that inadvertently, following paragraph has been recorded in the order dated 19.07.2017:- "The CAT has relied upon the decision dated 18.7.2014 rendered in O.A. NO.1361/HR/2012, where similarly situated applicants had sought re-fixation of their pay. Respondents No.2 and 3 before the CAT were directed to re-calculate the retiral benefits of applicant No.2 and 3 as admissible to them after stepping up of their salary."

On 27.10.2017, notice of the review application was issued to the learned counsel for the non-applicant/respondents. However, there is no representation on their behalf.

5.

After hearing the learned counsel for the review applicant/petitioners and perusing the averments made in the review application, we deem it appropriate to delete the following paragraph from the order dated 19.07.2017:- "The CAT has relied upon the decision dated 18.7.2014 rendered in O.A. NO.1361/HR/2012, where similarly situated applicants had sought re-fixation of their pay. Respondents

No.2 and 3 before the CAT were directed to re-calculate the retiral benefits of applicant No.2 and 3 as admissible to them after stepping up of their salary."

6.

Review applications stand disposed of.

(AJAY KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE (AMIT RAWAL) December 08, 2017 JUDGE savita Whether Speaking/Reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No