The Union Of India v. Bibek Kumar

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16209 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.

The Union of India through the D.G. cum Secretary, Department of Posts, Govt. of India, Sansad Marg, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi- 110001. 2.

The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna- 800001. 3.

The Postmaster General, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur- 842002. 4.

The Director of Postal Services, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur- 842002. 5.

The Sr. Superintendent of Post Offices, Saran Division, Chapra- 841301. ... ... Petitioners

Versus

Sunil Kumar Singh Son of Late Pashupati Nath Singh Resident of VillageJaitpur, P.S.- Daudpur, District- Saran (Chapra). ... ... Respondent ====================================================== with Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14503 of 2021 ====================================================== 1.

The Union of India through the D.G. cum Secretary, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi - 110001 2.

The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, Patna- 80001 3.

The Postmaster General North Region, Muzaffarpur - 842002 4.

The Director of Postal Services, Northern Region, Muzaffarpur - 842002 5.

The Superintendent of Post Offices, Darbhanga Division, Darbhanga - 846005 ... ... Petitioners

Versus

Bibek Kumar Son of Sri Uma Nath Pandey Resident of Qr. No. L/115A, Near Railway Sharan- Ashthali, Kathalwari, Railway Colony, P.O.- Lalbagh, District- Darbhanga ... ... Respondent ====================================================== Appearance :

(In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 16209 of 2021) For the Petitioners :

Mr. Deepak Kumar, Senior CGC Mr. Arvind Kumar, CGC For the Respondent :

Mr. Jayant Kumar Karn, Advocate Mr. Hemant Kumar Karn, Advocate (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 14503 of 2021) For the Petitioners :

Mr. A.K. Ojha, Senior CGC Mr. Arvind Kumar, CGC For the Respondent :

Mr. Jayant Kumar Karn, Advocate Mr. Hemant Kumar Karn, Advocate ======================================================

2/4 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD) Date : 10-09-2025 These two writ applications have been preferred by the Union of India through D.G.-cum-Secretary, Department of Posts, Government of India and its Officers challenging the order dated 19.07.2019 in O.A. No. 688 of 2019 and M.A. No. 275 of 2019 as also the order dated 31.05.2018 in O.A. No. 734 of 2017 and M.A. No. 246 of 2018 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') respectively.

2. By the impugned orders, the learned Tribunal has been pleased to allow the O.A. filed by the respondents herein and a direction has been issued to the present petitioners to finalize the selection process for the post of GDSBPM at Tarwa Pojhia Branch Post Office, Saran Postal Division and Antour Branch Post Office, Darbhanga Postal Division respectively.

3. Both the applications have been heard at length. Certain queries were made by this Court with regard to the plea of parity raised by the respondents as it was pointed out to this Court that the petitioners have complied with similar directions issued by the Tribunal which have not been interfered with by a learned coordinate Bench of this Court in CWJC No. 10753 of 2018 (The

3/4 Union of India and Others Vs. Amrita Kumari), CWJC No. 25293 of 2019 (The Union of India and Others Vs. Saundrya Kumar) and CWJC No. 25821 of 2019 (The Union of India and Others Vs. Afroz Alam).

4. Mr. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners had taken time to seek instructions and come back to this Court.

5. Today when the matters were called out, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners in both the writ applications has submitted at the outset that he has instructions from the petitioners to withdraw these writ applications. It has been informed that the petitioners are going to comply with the directions of the Tribunal, however, for this purpose, they would request this Court to grant two months time from today.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that he would not oppose the prayer of the petitioners for seeking extension of time to comply with the directions of the Tribunal.

7. In the circumstances, these writ applications are being disposed of as withdrawn. The undertaking of the petitioners before this Court to comply with the order of the Tribunal within two months shall be brought to the notice of the Tribunal where the contempt proceeding is said to be pending and the Tribunal shall keep the contempt proceeding in abeyance for next two months.

4/4

8. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioners has further submitted that while finalizing the selection of the respondents, the Department would need some co-operation from the respondents also as they would be required to provide their certificates etc. for due verification.

9. It is further submitted that if any reconstruction of records would be required, to all possible extent, the respondents would co-operate. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that if any such occasion would arise, the respondents shall certainly cooperate with the Department to the extent possible.

10. In view of what have been informed to this Court by Mr. Ojha, learned Senior Counsel saying that perhaps on earlier occasion, he was not properly instructed, therefore, he was not able to answer the queries of this Court, we withdraw the cost imposed upon the petitioners vide our order dated 09.09.2025.

11. Both the writ applications are disposed of accordingly.

(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J) (Sourendra Pandey, J) lekhi/- AFR/NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 11.09.2025 Transmission Date