K. M. Joseph, J. The petitioners challenge the order passed by the Tribunal on the application (O.A.No.1186/2013) filed by the respondent, who is a retired railway servant. Following are the prayers sought for in the O.A.:
“a). Leave encashment for the number of days of leave to his credit as on the date of superannuation subject to the maximum of 300 days.
b). Accident free service award.
c). Composite transfer grant.
passes.
d). Post retirement complementary
e). Medical facilities covered under the Railway Employees Liberalized Health scheme. “
2. We notice in the impugned order that when the case was taken up before the Tribunal, the learned counsel for the petitioners herein had submitted that the benefits enumerated under (a) to (c) have already been granted to the respondent. In regard to prayer(d), in the order it is stated as follows:
O.P.(CAT) No. 100/2014 2 “3. As regards (d) post retirement complementary passes, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the respondents that if the applicant makes an appropriate application in this regard it will be duly considered and passes will be issued to him without any delay. As regards (e), it is submitted by the learned counsel that applicant is prepared to remit one month's salary in order to enable him to get the benefit of the said scheme. The above submission is recorded.”
Thereafter, it is further stated as follows:
“4. It will be open to the applicant to do the needful as regards (d) & (e) are concerned. If such a request is received, appropriate action in the matter shall be taken as expeditiously as possible at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
Interest is also awarded at the rate of 9% from 1/5/2011 till the actual date of payment.
3. When we pointed out to the learned counsel for the petitioners that in view of what is seen recorded in the O.P.(CAT) No. 100/2014 3 order it could not be open for us to consider the question of judicial review, verified petition is filed producing the affidavit of the counsel appearing for the petitioners in the Tribunal and Ext.P5 letter dated 7/1/2014 issued by the Divisional Personnel Officer to the Tribunal.
We see no reason to exercise our power under judicial review in view of the nature of observations contained in the order. Without prejudice to any right available to the petitioners, if so advised, to seek review and without expressing any view in the matter, the petition is dismissed.
Sd/-
K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/-
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, JUDGE dpk.
/True copy/ P.S. to Judge.