SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Before:- S. Saghir Ahmad and D.P. Wadhwa, JJ.

Civil Appeal No. 2047 of 1999 (arising out of S.L.P. (C) No. 6148 of 1998). D/d. 22.3.1999

Union of India - Appellants

Versus

Charles David - Respondents

Constitution of India, Article 133 - Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, Section 14 - Controversy raised in this appeal concluded by three Judge Bench in AIR 1998 Supreme Court 2073 in which it was held that benefit would be available only to those casual labourers who had been working on open line and not to casual labourers working on a project - Contention of respondents that they are all open line casual labourers and tribunal has wrongly described them as project casual labourers - Held, that they may approach Tribunal for correcting factual error in judgment - No relief on that point can be given in civil appeal.

[Paras 2 and 3]

Cases Referred :-

Union of India v. K.G. Radhakrishna Panicker, 1998(2) SCT 604 (SC).

JUDGMENT

S. Saghir Ahmad, J. - Leave granted.

2. The controversy raised in this appeal is concluded by a Three Judge Bench decision of this Court in Union of India v. K.G. Radhakrishna Panicker, 1998(5) SCC 111 : AIR 1998 Supreme Court 2073 : 1998(2) SCT 604 (SC) in which it has been held that the benefit would be available only to those casual labourers who had been working on open line and not to Casual Labourers working on a Project.

3. Learned counsel for the respondents contends that they are all open line casual labourers and the Tribunal has wrongly described them as project casual labourers. It is also stated that an application for correction was not made before the Tribunal as the Tribunal had granted relief to both categories of casual labourers. If that be so, they may approach the tribunal for correcting the factual error in the judgment. So far this Court is concerned, the relief on that point cannot be given to the respondents. In view of the above, the Appeal is disposed of in the above terms.

Appeal dismissed.