Patna High Court
Sunita DeviversusThe Union of India
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISPOSED
Holding
The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file a representation before the Principal Chief Personnel Officer and directed the respondent to decide it within a stipulated period, thereby disposing of the petition.
Summary
Sunita Devi filed a writ petition in the Patna High Court challenging a CAT order that permitted withdrawal of her original application and dismissed her review. She sought liberty to file a representation before the Principal Chief Personnel Officer of Western Railway for redress of her grievances and requested the court to set a timeline for consideration. The respondents, senior railway officials, raised no objection to granting such liberty. The Court granted the petitioner liberty to file the representation within four weeks and directed the respondent to pass a reasoned order within six weeks, reiterating that she could approach the appropriate judicial forum if her grievances remained unredressed. Consequently, the writ petition was disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether the petitioner should be granted liberty to file a representation before the Principal Chief Personnel Officer of Western Railway after the CAT order.
- Whether the High Court can prescribe specific time limits for filing the representation and for the respondent to decide the matter.
- Whether the writ petition should be dismissed or disposed of following the grant of liberty.
Legislation cited
- Central Administrative Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987 — s. Rule 6(2)
Subjects
- writ petition
- administrative law
- Central Administrative Tribunal
- representation
- railway personnel
- liberty to approach
- time limit
- review dismissal
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2815 of 2026
======================================================
Sunita Devi (Female) Mother of Late Ramayan Kumar and wife of
Vivekanand Singh, resident of village-Sirsi Samyagarh, P.O-Samyagarh, P.S-
Ghoswari, District-Patna, Bihar-803306
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the General Manager, Western Railway,
Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.
2. The Principal Chief Personnel Officer, Western Railway, Churchgate,
Mumbai-400020.
3. The Deputy Chief Personnel Officer (Head Quarter), Western Railway,
Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.
4. The Deputy Chief Personnel Officer (Welfare), Western Railway,
Churchgate, Mumbai-400020.
5. The Senior Material Manager (M and D) /Stores/HQ/CCG/WR/HP, Western
Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai-400020
6. Supiriya wife of Late Ramayan Kumar, resident of village and P.O-Sabnima,
P.S-Bakhtiarpur, District-Patna.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ram Nibash Prasad, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Deepak Kumar, Sr. CGC
Mr. Arbind Kumar, CGC
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL ORDER
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHIT KUMAR SHAH)
3 10-03-2026 The present writ petition has been filed assailing the
order dated 10.10.2025 passed by the learned Central
Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna (hereinafter
referred to as the ‘Ld. CAT, Patna’) in OA No.050/00707/2025,
whereby and whereunder the original application filed by the
Patna High Court CWJC No.2815 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
2/3
petitioner was permitted to be withdrawn and accordingly the
original application has stood dismissed as withdrawn with
liberty to the petitioner to approach the appropriate judicial
forum. The petitioner has also challenged the order dated
04.12.2025 passed by the Ld. CAT, Patna in RA
No.050/00018/2025, whereby and whereunder the review
application has been dismissed by circulation.
2. At the outset, the learned counsel for the petitioner
submits that the petitioner be granted liberty to file appropriate
representation before the Principal Chief Personnel Officer,
Western Railway, Churchgate, Mumbai (respondent No.2) for
redressal of her grievances and the respondent No.2 be directed
to dispose of the same within a stipulated time frame,
whereafter the petitioner shall approach the appropriate judicial
forum in terms of Rule 6(2) of the Central Administrative
Tribunal (Procedure) Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as the
‘Rules, 1987’) in case of any subsisting grievance.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the respondents
has got no objection in case the petitioner is granted liberty to
file appropriate representation before the respondent No.2.
4. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the
case, we deem it fit and proper to grant liberty to the petitioner
Patna High Court CWJC No.2815 of 2026(3) dt.10-03-2026
3/3
to file appropriate representation before the respondent No.2
and in case such representation is filed within a period of four
weeks from today, the respondent No.2 shall consider the same
in accordance with law and pass a reasoned and a speaking
order thereon, within a period of six weeks, thereafter.
5. It is clarified that in case the grievances of the
petitioner are not redressed with the passing of appropriate order
by the respondent No.2, on the representation to be filed by the
petitioner, she shall be at liberty to approach the appropriate
judicial forum, as has been observed in the impugned order
dated 10.10.2025.
6. Accordingly, the present writ petition stands
disposed of.
(Mohit Kumar Shah, J)
(Arun Kumar Jha, J)
GAURAV S./-
U
Checking your session…