JAYA ROY, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties.
(2.) THE applicantrespondent no.1 approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench at Ranchi, by filing O.A No.168/2004 by impleading Union of India as party along with other authorities of the Railways also as party. The said O.A was allowed, vide order dated 9th January, 2007. That order of the Tribunal was challenged by preferring writ petition before this Court by the Union of India and that too through Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railways by filing W.P (C) No.5026/2007, which was dismissed, vide judgment dated 4th October, 2007, and Division Bench of this Court entertained the plea of the appellantUnion of India that the Tribunal has directed to pass the order of relaxation by the General Manager of East Central Railways, who has no jurisdiction and therefore, specific direction was issued by the Division Bench of this Court in W.P (C) No.5026/2007 that the competent authority shall issue appropriate order. In spite of attaining finality of the judgment of this Court passed in W.P (C) No.5026/2007 dated 4th October, 2007, the appellant rejected the applicantrespondent no.1's claim and therefore, the respondent no.1 again had to approach the Tribunal by filing O.A No.25/2009. The said O.A was allowed by the order dated 13th August, 2010. Learned counsel appearing for Union of India submitted that Union of India was party but not through appropriate authroity. On such plea, final judgment of the Division Bench of this Court is being challenged in the subsequent proceedings before the Tribunal. We are of the considered opinion that the Tribunal has already considered all the issues in detail and we hold that the issues regarding the claim of the applicantrespondent no.1 has already been decided by the Tribunal and ultimately by the Division Bench of this Court.
(3.) IN view of the above reasons, we do not find any merit in this writ petition, which is dismissed.;