J.S.Khehar, J. - (1.) THROUGH the instant writ petition, the petitioner herein has impugned the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh in OA No.536/HR/2001, decided on 16.4.2002. A perusal of the order passed by the Administrative Tribunal, referred to above, reveals that the learned counsel representing the petitioner herein , had not disputed the fact, and in fact, conceded the position that the controversy raised in Original Application No.536/HR/2001 was precisely the same, as has been decided by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in "S.R.Dhingra and others vs. Chairman, Railway Board and others O.A. No.2425 of 2000, decided on 22.2.2002". The factual position noticed herein above is still acknowledged by the learned counsel for the petitioner herein. He further states that the decision rendered by the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in S.R.Dhingra's case (supra) , is now the subject matter of challenge and that the relief due to the petitioner, should be in terms of the final determination of the controversy in S.R.Dhingra's case (supra). This position is accepted by the learned counsel representing respondent no.2.
(2.) IN view of the above, the instant writ petition is disposed of with a rider that respondent no.2 will be entitled to such benefits alone as are eventually determined on the final outcome of the controversy in S.R.Dhingra's case (supra). Disposed of in the aforesaid terms.;