UNION OF INDIA Vs. DAYABHAI KALYANBHAI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY way of filing this petition the petitioners original respondents Nos.1, 2 and 3 before the Central Administrative Tribunal have challenged the judgment and order dated 8th October 2004 passed in R.A. No.66 of 2004 in Original Application No.296 of 2003 whereby it has been further ordered, 'if the name of the applicant is in Live Register, he would be entitled to re-engagement in his turn subject to availability of vacancy on he is being found suitable' by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahemedabad Bench at Ahmedabad.

(2.) THE short facts of the present case are that the THE respondent who was engaged as a casual labourer by the petitioners filed Original Application No.539 of 1995 contending that his name was not placed in the Live Register maintained by the respondent and the said application was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 6th December 1996 with a direction that the workman may produce necessary documents to the Divisional Railway Manager, Bhavnagar and if the claim of the respondent-workman is found to be genuine, his name shall be placed at the bottom of the Live Register and he shall be engaged as per his term by the respondent-workman.

(3.) THE respondent-workman filed Review Application No.66 of 2004 contending that on receiving the copy of the supplementary Casual Labour Live Register dated 1.12.1993 and letter dated 27th April 1994 at a later stage, it was claimed that the seniority has been assigned on the basis of the date of engagement and the persons who have worked for fewer dates as compared to the respondent herein had been engaged. Though the said Review Application was rejected, it was directed in paragraph 8 that if the name of the applicant is in live register, he would be entitled to re-engagement in his turn subject to availability of vacancy and on his being found suitable. Hence, this petition.