Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, K. V. JAYAKUMAR, JJ
UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF DEFENCE (FINANCE), NEW DELHI – Appellant
Versus
TESSY TOM – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. purpose of review petition - to correct errors. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. entitlement under the macp scheme post voluntary transfer. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments presented about misconceptions. (Para 5) |
| 4. judicial guidelines and limitations on review. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
K. V. Jayakumar, J.
This Review Petition is preferred under Order XLVII Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure , seeking to review the judgment of this Court dated 12.02.2025 in OP(CAT) No.176/2020.
2. The review petitioners herein are the petitioners in OP(CAT)
No. 176/2020, which was dismissed by this Court by judgment dated 12.02.2025. The grievance of the review petitioners is that the findings arrived at in the judgment dated 12.02.2025 are erroneous. The petitioners state that there are certain errors and mistakes apparent on the face of record.
3. Sri. C. Dinesh, the learned counsel for the review petitioners, submits that the Original Petition was filed to set aside Ext.P6 order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench dated 26.11.2019 in O.A.No.54/2016, whereby the review petitioners were directed to grant Grade Pay of Rs.4600 to the respondent under the Modified Assured Career
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
