Daya Shankar vs Union Of India And Ors

V. Ajay Kumar, J

MA No.607/2018

In the circumstances, and for the reasons mentioned therein, the MA No.607/2018 filed for condoning of the delay in filing RA is allowed.

RA No. 19/2018

The OA No.2905/2016 of the applicant was dismissed along with OA Nos. 3936/2017 and 63/2015 by way of a common order cdated 15.11.2017. Seeking review of the said order, the present RA has been filed.

The Review Applicant filed the instant RA mainly on the ground that the Hon'ble Apex Court by its order dated 08.01.2018 (i.e. much after the disposal of the OA of the applicant by this Tribunal) in Union of India and Others Vs. Kala Singh and Others, held that "since the direction in the impugned order is only to revisit the Scheme in question, no interference is called for at this stage and the petitioner(s) may take a conscious decision in the matter within a period of 6 weeks from today" and hence, dismissing the OA was an error apparent on the face of record.

Firstly, any judgment or view expressed by any Co-ordinate Bench or a higher Court subsequent to the disposal of a particular case cannot be a ground for reviewing of the order which was passed prior to the said judgment or view.

In the instant case, the OA was dismissed on 15.11.2017 whereas the applicant places reliance on an order of the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 08.01.2018, i.e., subsequent to the dismissal of the OA, as a ground for review and accordingly the same cannot be said to be a valid ground for review.

Secondly, it is relevant to reiterate that the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Kala Singh and Others Vs. Union of India and Others categorically held that LARSGES Scheme does not stand to the test of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and that the policy is a device evolved by the Railways to make back-door entries in public employment and brazenly militates against equality in public employment, before directing the respondents to revisit the said policy. The Hon'ble Apex Court while disposing of the SLP filed against the said decision has not interfered with the said declaration in any manner and on the other hand, it only observed that "if any party is affected by the decision taken, such party may take remedy against the same in accordance with law". Hence, even this order in no way help the review applicant.

Thirdly, the OA of the applicant was dismissed also by following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Telengana Boggu Gani Karmika Sangam Vs. Satish Kumar and Others (SLP No.11566/2017 dated 17.04.2017).

In the circumstances and for the aforesaid reasons, the RA is dismissed in circulation. No costs.