Baiju Kumar v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7166 of 2019 ====================================================== 1.

Baiju Kumar S/o Dhaneshwar Yadav Resident of Village and P.O.- Sakaradas, Nawada, P.S.- Wazirganj, District- Gaya. 2.

Ajay Kumar S/o Gupteshwar Ram Resident of Village- Chenari, P.S.- Chenari, District- Rohtas- 821104.

3.

Umesh Ram S/o Vindeshwari Ram Resident of Village- Panruhar, P.S.- Darihat, District- Rohtas.

4.

Ranjit Das S/o Lekha Ravidas Resident of Village and P.O.- Teliyadih, P.S.- Jhajha, District- Jamui.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Chairman, Railway Board, New Delhi. 2.

The General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur. 3.

The Chief Personnel Officer, East Central Railways, Hajipur. 4.

The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Rail, Danapur. 5.

The Dy. Chief Personnel Officer Polson Complex, Railway Recruitment Cell, Digha Ghat, East Central Railway, Patna- 11. 6.

The Assistant Personnel Officer (Recruitment), Railway Recruitment Cell, East Central Railway, Polson Complex, Digha Ghat, Patna-11. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ram Babu, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Din Bandhu Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR ORAL ORDER 13-05-2019 The petitioners have approached this Court for a direction to the respondents to issue appointment letters in favour of the petitioners against the advertisement which had been issued in the year 2010 for appointment to Group D posts in East Central Railway on the ground that the petitioners had qualified in the PET as well as in written test and had also been successful in the medical test but were kept out of the

Patna High Court CWJC No.7166 of 2019(4) dt.13-05-2019 2/2 selection process.

The petitioners have rested their respective claims on a judgment of the Supreme Court which has been brought on record by way of supplementary affidavit.

Whatever may be the situation, with respect to the service condition/appointment/selection, the correct forum for the petitioners to agitate would be the Central Administrative Tribunal.

The preliminary objection raised by Mr. Din Bandhu Singh for the Railways Department is tenable. The petitioners are permitted to withdraw this petition for preferring necessary application/petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal. It is expected that the Tribunal shall dispose of the application/petition of the petitioners as expeditiously as possible. The writ petition stands dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty aforesaid.

(Ashutosh Kumar, J) krishna/- U