ORDER

1. Leave granted. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Learned counsel for the appellants submitted that the point raised in this appeal is clearly covered by the decision of this Court in Krishena Kumar v. Union of India ((1990) 4 SCC 207 : 1991 SCC (L&S) 112 : (1990) 14 ATC 846) and the Tribunal was wrong in taking a contrary view relying upon the decision of this Court in R. Subramaniam v. Chief Personnel Officer, Central Rly., Ministry of Railways ((1996) 10 SCC 72 : 1996 SCC (L&S) 1340 : AIR 1995 SC 983). In R. Subramaniam ((1996) 10 SCC 72 : 1996 SCC (L&S) 1340 : AIR 1995 SC 983) what had happened was that benefit of the order passed in his favour was not given to him even though SLP flied by the Union of India against it was dismissed and the review application filed by it thereafter was also dismissed. R. Subramaniam therefore filed a writ petition which came to be allowed. That case was thus decided on its own facts. The Tribunal was therefore not right in deciding the respondents application in his favour by following that decision. Realising this difficulty in this way, learned counsel for the respondent tried to support the order of the Tribunal with the decisio