UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAM POOP

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ALL that was contended on behalf of the petitioner -Railway administration is that the respondent workman Ram Roop had not worked. In a certiorari action the Court is examining the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal. If the argument is that the finding of the Tribunal is incorrect then error manifest or otherwise must be shown. If perversity is a submission, then perversity has to be pleaded.

(2.) HAVING heard the submissions made on behalf of the Railway administration and having perused the record as presented in the present writ petition, the Court finds that the submission of railway administration is itself perverse. It neither recognises the law, its railway establishment code nor the decision of the Supreme Court and keeps on harping that the workman has not worked.

(3.) THIS petition has been filed merely because no official is prepared to take even a petty responsibility to accept the decision of the Tribunal. Record for record, the number of days this workman has worked, there is a statement in the face of administration. Merely because the administration will not shoulder the responsibility and file cases until the Court of last resort to harass the workman, is not administrative justice.