Hemant Gupta, J. - (1.) CHALLENGE in the present writ petition is to an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (for short 'the Tribunal') on 18.12.2012, whereby an Original Application filed by respondent No. 2 (hereinafter to be referred as 'the applicant') was allowed in terms of the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported as S.K.M. Haider v. Union of India & others : (2011) 4 SCC 700. Subsequent application for review filed by the petitioners was also dismissed vide order dated 21.10.2013. Such order is also subject matter of challenge in the present writ petition. The applicant was working as Constable in Railway Protection Force and was declared unfit in B -I & B -II category, however, declared fit in C -I & C -II category. Since no post for C -I & C -II category was available in Railway Protection Force, the name of the applicant was recommended to the Divisional Personnel Officer, Northern Railways, Ambala Cantt for alternative job. Thereafter, the applicant was appointed as Return Courier in the year 1991 and later appointed as Luggage Porter. On 25.09.2002, the applications were invited for selection of Ticket Collector, Grade Rs. 3050 -4590 (RSRP) Against 33 1/3% ranker's quota from the Class IV non -technical staff of Traffic & Commercial Departments. The applicant appeared for the test and was placed at Sr. No. 5, whereas one S.K.M. Haider was placed at Sr. No. 48. The applicant and S.K.M. Haider appeared for viva voce on 25.02.2003 and were placed at Sr. Nos. 1 & 25 respectively on the panel for the post of Ticket Collector. In pursuance of the panel so finalized, the applicant was directed to appear before the Medical Authorities for medical examination, but was declared unfit in B -I & B -II category relying upon medical examination earlier conducted in the year 1990, when the applicant was posted in Railway Protection Force as Constable.
(2.) S .K.M. Haider, whose name appears at Sr. No. 25 in the panel, in which the name of the petitioner appears at Sr. No. 1, challenged his rejection on the basis of medical examination in B -I & B -II category. The said petition was allowed by the Supreme Court in the judgment referred to above. The applicant claimed the same benefit, as was granted to S.K.M. Haider after the judgment of the Supreme Court, but the same was declined for the reason that the benefit of such judgment cannot be given to the applicant since the applicant was not party in the said case.
(3.) BEFORE this Court, learned counsel for the petitioners has vehemently argued that the judgment of the Supreme Court in S.K.M. Haider's case (supra) does not lay down any principle of law, as it is a judgment passed by the Supreme Court to do the substantial justice and, thus, the applicant cannot claim appointment to the post of Ticket Collector. It is contended that a candidate cannot be appointed/promoted against the Rules. Reliance is placed upon Supreme Court judgment reported as Union of India v. S.K. Saigal & Others : 2007 (1) SLR 207.;