Shambhu Ram v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.10725 of 2018 ====================================================== Shambhu Ram son of Dhani Chand Ram, Resident of Village- Gorai, Post Office- Balha, Via- Pusa, Police Station- Chakmehsi, District- Samastipur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Secretary, Department of Post, New Delhi. 2.

The Director General, Department of Post, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi. 3.

The Superintending Engineer, Postal Civil Wing, Meghdoot Building, G.P.O. Complex, Patna.

4.

The Executive Engineer Civil, Postal Sub- Division, Muzaffarpur. 5.

The Assistant Engineer Civil, Postal Sub- Division, Muzaffarpur. ... ... Respondent/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Satya Narayan Mishra, Adv.

For the Respondent/s :

Mr. S.D Sanjay Addl. Soc. Gen.

Ms. Punam Kumari Singh, C.G.C.

====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY) Date : 24-01-2020 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Union of India.

In the present case, the petitioner is challenging the order dated 23rd of May, 2017 passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 463 of 2013 rejecting the claim of the petitioner for his regularization.

Firstly, this issue came for consideration before the Tribunal in O.A. No. 685 of 2005 and the Tribunal vide its detailed order dated 10.1.2007 rejected the claim of the petitioner for

Patna High Court CWJC No.10725 of 2018 dt.24-01-2020 2/2 regularization which was challenged by the petitioner before this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 10199 of 2007 in which the petitioner, vide order dated 20.5.2008, failed to find any favorable order. Further the petitioner filed petition before the Tribunal for the same cause of action but, the Tribunal, considering the fact that the petitioner had moved before the Tribunal for the same relief, refused to grant relief to the petitioner placing reliance on the earlier order passed in O.A. No. 685 of 2005 (for the same cause of action). There should be an end of the litigation. The present matter is barred by res-judicata and, as such, we do not find any merit in the present writ application and the same is, accordingly, dismissed.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) ( Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) rishi/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date 03.02.2020 Transmission Date