High CourtsDivision Bench(2025) 02 KL CK 1304

Vibina V.C vs Union Of India

High Court Of Kerala · Decided on 28 February 2025

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil K. Narendran, J · Harisankar V. Menon, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Review Petition No. 851 Of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 328 words

Harisankar V. Menon, J.

1.

The applicant before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam, who was the petitioner in OP(CAT) No.120 of 2024 has filed the captioned review petition seeking review of the judgment dated 10.07.2024, dismissing the OP(CAT).

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the review petitioner and the learned Central Government Counsel.

3.

The only contention raised by the learned counsel for the review petitioner is with reference to the contents of Annexure-A3, by which, the review petitioner is informed that the application for compassionate appointment is not being considered “this time” and the same will be considered against future compassionate ground vacancy.

4.

We have considered the contentions raised as above and the connected records.

5.

The Tribunal has rejected the application at the instance of the review petitioner essentially on the grounds of delay. We further notice that though the review petitioner sought a review of the orders of the Tribunal, placing reliance on some additional documents, the said prayer is also rejected. It is in such circumstances that the petitioner has filed the writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the orders issued by the Tribunal. By Annexure-A3, the review petitioner is informed that the application for compassionate appointment will be considered against future compassionate ground vacancy. True, as held by the Apex Court in N.C.Santhosh v. State of Karnataka and Others [(2020) 7 SCC 617], the claim as above is to be considered with reference to the norms that are prevailing on the date of consideration of the claim.

6.

In the light of the afore, we make it clear that the legal right, if any, of the review petitioner for consideration of his application against future compassionate ground vacancy, in the light of Annexure A3 dated 01.11.2018, is not to be curtailed by the judgment of this Court dated 10.07.2024, whereby OP(CAT) No.120 of 2024 stands dismissed.

With the afore observation, this review petition would stand disposed of.