The Union Of India v. Chandra Bhushan Kumar,
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 8352 of 2026 ====================================================== 1.
The Union of India Through the Director General, Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.
2.
The Chief Postmaster General, Bihar Circle, G.P.O. Complex Patna-800001. 3.
The Postmaster General, East Region, Bhagalpur-812001. 4.
The Director of Postal Services, Eastern Region, Bhagalpur-812001. 5.
The Superintendent of Post Offices, Saharsa Postal Division, Saharsa852201. ... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
Chandra Bhushan Kumar, Son of Mohan Prasad Singh, Resident of Village - Udakishunganj, PO Udakishunganj, PS - Udakishunganj, District -Madhepura now dismissed from the post of GDSBPM, Itahari, BO in account with SA Nagar SO under Sahasa postal Division, Saharsa - 852216. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s :
Mr. Ram Tujabh Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :
====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH) Date: 15-07-2026 The present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 16.12.2025 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the "learned CAT") in O.A. No. 050/00732/2024, whereby
2/4 and whereunder the O.A. has been allowed with the following directions:- "(i) The dismissal order, i.e. Memo No. H-82/81/Ch-II/L dated 25.03.2022 (Annexure-A/6), Appellate Order, i.e. Memo No. Vig/ER/Appeal/C. Kumar/SHS/2022 dated 15.03.2023 (Annexure-A/8) and revisional Order i.e. Memo No. Vig/ER/RP/GDS/C.B. Kumar/SHS/2024 dated 30.07.2024 (Annexure-A/10) are quashed and set aside. (ii) As a consequence, the applicant is to be reinstated with consequential relief to be decided by the respondents as per the law and procedure for this intervening period that is from the dismissal to the reinstatement. The respondents are at liberty to complete the inquiry by suitably modifying the list of witnesses and affording the applicant an opportunity to cross examine the author/ signatory to the very basis of the charge leveled against him mentioned at point (d) above."
2.
We may at the inception note that since we do not intend to interfere with the impugned order dated 16.12.2025, no notice is being issued to the sole respondent.
3.
At the very outset, the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India, who is appearing in the present case for the petitioners, has submitted that now the petitioners do not intend to assail the impugned order dated 16.12.2025, however they are seeking a clarification regarding the observations made in
3/4 paragraph No. 6 (a) & (b) of the impugned order which are not factually totally correct as would be apparent from a bare perusal of the documents referred to therein, which form part of the pleadings made before the Ld. CAT and have been placed at running page Nos. 51 to 53 of the brief.
4.
It is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India that the Superintendent of Post Offices, Saharsa Dn., Saharsa had written a letter dated 05.10.2016 to the Secretary, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna (Bihar) regarding re-verification of mark-sheets of several persons, including the respondent herein, who were engaged on the post of GDS. In response to the said letter dated 05.10.2016, the Examination Controller, Bihar Sanskrit Shiksha Board, Patna (Bihar) vide letter dated 14.05.2018, while enclosing a list of 15 candidates, had informed the Superintendent of Post Offices, Saharsa Dn., Saharsa that as far as the candidates listed at serial Nos. 01 to 08 of the said list are concerned, the mark-sheets have been found to be uniform while the mark-sheets of the candidates named at serial Nos. 09 to 15, including that of the sole respondent herein, have not been issued by the Board's Office.
5.
Having regard to the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the Union of India, we are of the considered
4/4 opinion that the contents of any document cannot be altered by any observation made in a judicial order and the same is not only required to be considered on its own face value by the Inquiry Officer but is also required to be proved by examining a competent witness by adhering to the rules of evidence. 6.
In light of the aforesaid, the present writ petition stands disposed off as not pressed.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J) (Rana Vikram Singh, J) GAURAV S./- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE Uploading Date 17.07.2026 Transmission Date