Judgment:
(Oral)
BY HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.D. ANAND, MEMBER (J)
1. Counter filed in the registry is taken on record.
2. In the context of an averment made on behalf of the applicant that the controversy in this O.A. is squarely covered by a decision rendered by the Banglore Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No 704/2001(Annexure A-2) and the view obtained by the Karnataka High Court in CWP NO. 6051/2002(Annexure A-3), learned counsel for the respondents is under instructions to state that the applicants cannot be held entitled to avail of the medical facilities from two departments. Learned counsel for the respondents points out that the applicants have been availing the medical facilities at the dispensary run by the Postal Department, a dispensation to which the applicants originally belong.
3. Learned counsel for the applicants, in the context of the averment aforementioned, is under instructions to state at the Bar that the applicants have not been availing of the medical facilities at the dispensary run by the Postal Department and they shall not avail of any medical facility available over there.
4. In view, thus, of the fact that the controversy aforesaid having been settled and there being no challenge to the fact that the controversy herein is otherwise covered by the decision aforementioned, this O.A. shall stand allowed in terms of the decision rendered by the Banglore Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 704/2001(Annexure A-2), which was upheld by the Karnataka High Court in CWP NO. 6051/2002(Annexure A-3).
5. There shall be no order as to costs in the facts and circumstances of the case.