Sujeet Kumar Singh v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2395 of 2023 ====================================================== Sujeet Kumar Singh son of Sri Ramlakhan Singh R/o Muhalla- Kaliket Nagar, Near Delhi Public School, Bailey Road, Patna, P.S.- Rupaspur, Dist.- Patna. ... ... Petitioner

Versus

1.

The Union of India through its Secretary, in the Department of Railway, New Delhi.

2.

The Chairman, Railway Board, New Delhi.

3.

The Director General Railway Protection Force (RPF), Railway Board, New Delhi.

4.

The Inspector General/ Headquarter, Railway Board, New Delhi. 5.

The Inspector General cum Principle Chief Security Commissioner, R.P.F. Hajipur.

6.

The Chief Security Commissioner, R.P.F. Hajipur. 7.

The Chief Administrative Officer, Rail Wheel Plant Bela, Dariyapur in the District of Saran.

8.

The Secretary to Chief Administrative Officer, Rail Wheel Plant Bela, Dariyapur in the District of Saran.

9.

The Deputy Director Central Crime Bureau (CCV) RPF, Railway Board New Delhi.

10.

The Director Central Vigilance Commission Satarkala Bhawan, G.P.O. Complex INA New Delhi.

11.

The Divisional Security Commissioner R.P.F. Samastipur Cum Enquiry Officer of Departmental Proceeding No. E/P/SF-05. ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Sanjeev Kumar, Advocate For the Railways :

Mr.Naresh Dikshit, Advocate Mr.Utsav Anand, JC to Mr. Naresh Dikshit.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL ORDER 04-05-2023 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Railways.

Keeping in view Section 14 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, the objection no. 32 as to maintainability of the petition is upheld.

Patna High Court CWJC No.2395 of 2023(2) dt.04-05-2023 2/2 Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw this application with liberty to file a fresh application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna, if so advised, in accordance with law.

Mr. Utsav Anand, learned JC to Mr. Naresh Dikshit, counsel for the Union of India has no objection to the same. In the circumstances, this application is permitted to be withdrawn with liberty to apply for his remedy before appropriate forum/Tribunal. If such application is presented within a period of 30 days from today, in case of a question of limitation, the Tribunal will consider that the petitioner was pursuing his remedy before this Court under some bonafide beliefs.

This Writ Application stands disposed of accordingly. (Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) Rajeev/- U