Rahul Kumar v. The Union Of India

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7874 of 2026 ====================================================== Rahul Kumar son of Late Arvind Prasad Yadav (Brother of Late Ompriya, Emp. ID 36329801828), resident of Shivpuri, ward no. 14, P.S. Saharsa, District Saharsa.

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Chairman, Railway Board, Ministry of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi-110001.

2.

The Secretary, Ministry of Railway, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi 110001. 3.

The General Manager, North Western Railway, Near Jawahar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan, PIN 302017.

4.

The General Manager (P), North Western Railway, Near Jawahar Circle, Jaipur, Rajasthan, - 302017.

5.

The Divisional Railway Manager, North Western Railway, Mall Road, Railway Colony, Ajmer, Rajasthan- 305001.

6.

The Divisional Railway Manager (P), North Western Railway, Mall Road, Railway Colony, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001.

7.

The Assistant Personnel Officer III/ Divisional Railway Manager (Establishment), North Western Railway, Mall Road, Railway Colony, Ajmer, Rajasthan 305001.

... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amit Kumar Singh, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Additional Solicitor General ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RANA VIKRAM SINGH ORAL ORDER (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH) 13-07-2026 Though the present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 24.03.2026 passed by the Ld. Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter referred to as the 'Ld. CAT') in OA No. 050/00179/2026, whereby and whereunder the original

Patna High Court CWJC No.7874 of 2026(2) dt.13-07-2026 2/2 application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed in limine on account of lack of territorial jurisdiction being vested with the Ld. CAT at Patna, however at the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner, realizing the constraint in view of Rule 6 of the Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987, seeks liberty on behalf of the petitioner to approach the appropriate Tribunal having appropriate jurisdiction for redressal of his subsisting grievances. Liberty, so sought, is granted. 2.

Accordingly, the present writ petition stands disposed of. (Mohit Kumar Shah, J) (Rana Vikram Singh, J) S.Sb/- U