(1.) The petitioner has filed the above Review Petition on the ground that there was an error on the face of the record, since P.K. Droukumari, K.C. Karthyayani and P.R. Vasantha were held to have attained superannuation and hence, the relief was confined to the compensation as directed therein.
(2.) The learned counsel rightly points out from the records that, P.K. Droukumari, K.C. Karthyayani and P.R. Vasantha have not reached the superannuation age of 60 years. In such circumstance, the contention of the petitioner is that, this Court having upheld the award of the Labour Court, the benefits due under the award has to, necessarily, be granted to the petitioners and the compensation awarded with respect to the above three persons has also to be corrected insofar as granting them the prayer for reinstatement.
(3.) Admittedly, the said issue was not argued before this Court at the time of hearing since all were under the impression that the petitioners had all crossed the age of superannuation. Having pointed out the discrepancy with respect to age, the Railways has filed a counter affidavit in the Review Petition wherein under paragraph 7 it has been specified so: