Sanjay Kumar Singh And ORS v. The Union Of India And ORS

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.681 of 2017 ======================================================

1. Sanjay Kumar Singh, Son of late Mahesh Singh, resident of Village-Ghataro, Police Station-Kartahan, District- Vaishali, State-Bihar

2. Ratnesh Kumar Ratnakar, Son of Sri Bindeshwari Prasad Kesari, Resident of Village-Shahpur Patori, Police Station-Patori, District Samastipur, State-Bihar

3. Bhudev Singh Son of Sri Bauna Ram, Resident of Village-SikariIV Hisa Nagad, Police Station-Pursikari, District-Agra, State -Uttar Pradesh

4. Dipen Kakati, Son of Sri Chandra Kant Nath Resident of Village-Jarabari, POlice Station-Raha, District-Nagaon, StateAssam

5. Dhananjay Kumar Pandey Son of late Rajendra Pandey Resident of Village-Dumari No.4, POlice Station-Jamadoba, DistrictDhanbad, State-Jharkhand

6. Pramod kumar Verma Son of Sri Narayan Prasad Mahto Resident of Village-Ghandaro, Police Station-Hirodih, District-Dhanbad, State-Jharkhand

7. Diganta Khaman Son of Premadhar Khaman, Resident of VillagePahuchungi, Police Station -Kakojibari, District-Shivasagar, State-Assam

8. Nilkamal Ray Son of Sri Sarveshwar Ray Resident of Villageharipur, Police Station-Abhayapuri, District-Bangoigaun, StateAssam

9. Umesh Prasad Son of Sri Sidheshwar Prasad Resident of VillageSurihar, POlice Station-Sutihar, District-Chhapara, State-Bihar

10. Babulal Kumawat Son of Sri Ramdev Resident of Village/Mohalla-Industrial Area Riico Road No.8, Saraswasti Nagar Rani Bazar Bikaner, Police Station-Vangashar, DistrictBikaner, State- Rajasthan 11.Ghanshyam Upadhyay Son of Sri Ram Mohan Upadhyay Resident of Village/Mohalla-545/449 Narpatbeda, Para, Lucknow, POlice Station Para, District-Lucknow, State-Uttar Pradesh ... ... Petitioners

Versus

1. The Union of India through its Director General, Railway Protection Force, Railway Bhawan (Railway Board), New Delhi

2. The Chief Security Commissioner Cum Inspector General, Raiway Protection Special Force Railway Bhawan (Railway Board), New Delhi

2/4

3. The Deputy Inspector General, Railway Protection Special Force, Railway Bhawan (Railway Board), New Delhi

4. The Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, Dhanbad as Chairman of the Committee Ancillary Staff, Rauilway Board Dhanbad

5. The Senoir Commandant Officer/ Commandant Officer, 11-BN/R.P.S.F. GHZ, Barauni, Bihar

6. The Senior Commandant Officer/ Commandant Officer, 8-BN/ R.PS.F., CRJ, West Bengal

7. The Senior Commandant Officer/ Commandant Officer, 8-BN/ R.P.S.F., Dhanbad, Jharkhand

8. The Senior Commandant Officer/ Commandant Officer, 1st-BN/ R.P.S.F., Lamding, Assam

9. The Senior Commandant Officer/ Commandant Officer, 3rd-BN/ R.P.S.F., Lucknow ... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Anil Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s :

Mr. Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate Mr. Ohm Prakash, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHIVAJI PANDEY ORAL JUDGMENT Date : 09-07-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the Railways.

In this case, the petitioners are seeking relief that this Court should issue a mandamus, commanding the respondents to produce the original record of the petitioners of the written examination held on 29-30.11.2014 regarding the change of category from Ancillary Staff to Constable Executive in R.P.S.F.

It appears that the petitioner no.1 have approached the Central Information Commission under Right to Information

3/4 Act and the Commission has passed the order, which is as follows:- "During the hearing, the CPIO submitted that the grievance of the appellant was redressed. The Commission appreciates the steps taken by the public authority for redressing the grievances of the appellant.

It was noted that information as sought for by the appellant in the said RTI application was not provided to the appellant so far.

The CPIO is directed to provide the complete and comprehensive information along with certified true copies of all documents sought for, including note sheet, correspondence etc. as available on record, free of charge, to the applicant within 10 days from the date of receipt of this order. A report may be sent to the Commission along with proof of dispatch of the reply to the appellant, within 7 days thereafter.

The case is disposed of accordingly.

Copy of the order be sent to both the parties free of charge."

Now, the alternative remedy is available to the petitioners, they should wait for the final order passed by the Commission.

4/4 In such view of the matter, this Court does not find any merit in this writ petition. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed.

(Shivaji Pandey, J) pawan/- AFR/NAFR N.A.F.R.

CAV DATE N/A.

Uploading Date 11.07.2018 Transmission Date N/A.