Created by Fuzzy Cloud

Patna High Court

Abhay Kumar SrivastavaversusThe Union of India through Sri Chhatrasal Singh, the General Manager

Decided
Disposal
DISPOSED

Holding

The court granted the petitioner liberty to agitate the remaining grievance before the concerned authority and disposed of the application.

Summary

The petitioner, Abhay Kumar Srivastava, filed a writ petition against the Union of India and several East Central Railway officials alleging that a grievance regarding payment remained unresolved. The railway authorities filed a show‑cause response stating that the payment had been made and the order complied with. The petitioner contended that despite the payment, certain grievances persisted. The bench held that the petitioner may pursue the remaining issues before the appropriate railway authority and that the present application does not require further judicial intervention. Accordingly, the application was disposed of.

Issues considered

  • What relief, if any, is available to the petitioner when the railway authorities claim that payment has been made but the petitioner alleges remaining grievances?

Subjects

  • writ jurisdiction
  • payment grievance
  • railway authority
  • procedural relief
  • show cause

Judgment

                      IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                               Miscellaneous Jurisdiction Case No.2383 of 2025
                                                       In
                                 Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.12571 of 2024
                 ======================================================
                 Abhay Kumar Srivastava Son of Late Shila Nath Prasad @ Lalanath Prasad,
                 resident of village- Sundarpur Bela, P.O.- Lalbagh, P.S. - University, District-
                 Darbhanga, presently residing at Hazrat Ali Road, Lakshmi Nagar, Ward no.
                 11, Kolhua Paigambarpur, Muzaffarpur, Pin - 843108.

                                                                               ... ... Petitioner/s
                                                   Versus
           1.    The Union of India through Sri Chhatrasal Singh, the General Manager East
                 Central Railway, Hajipur - 844101.
           2.    Sri Chhatrasal Singh, the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur.
           3.    Sri Vivek Bhushan Sood, the Divisional Railway Manager, East Central
                 Railway, Sonepur.
           4.    Sri Pankaj Kumar Sinha, the Divisional Railway Manager (Personnel), East
                 Central Railway, Sonepur.
           5.    The Senior Divisional Mechanical Manager, East Central Railway, Sonepur.
           6.    The Divisional Mechanical Manager, East Central Railway, Sonepur.
           7.    The Chief Crue Controller, East Central Railway, Muzaffarpur.

                                                        ... ... Opposite Party/s
                 ======================================================
                 Appearance :
                 For the Petitioner/s     :     Mr.Madhav Krishna
                 For the Opposite Party/s :     Manoj Kumar Singh (CGC)
                                                Ms. Sweta Suman, Advocate
                 =====================================================
                 CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY
                        and
                        HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALOK KUMAR SINHA
                                       ORAL ORDER

                 (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJIV ROY)

6   18-03-2026                        Heard the parties.

                                2. A show cause has come on behalf of opposite party

                   no.4, Divisional Railway Manger (Personnel), East Central

                   Railway, Sonepur and it shows that payment has been made and

                   the order has been complied with.

                                3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the
       Patna High Court MJC No.2383 of 2025(6) dt.18-03-2026
                                                   2/2




                 petitioner that some grievance is still there.

                              4. In view of aforesaid, the petitioner     is granted

                 liberty to agitate the matter before the concerned authority for

                 the remaining grievance(s).

                              5. The present application is accordingly disposed of.


                                               (Rajiv Roy, J)


                                          (Alok Kumar Sinha, J)

HR/-

U


Continue reading with your account

Sign in to read the full judgment. It’s free.

Sign in to read

Checking your session…

For a signed copy suitable for filing, refer to the court's website.