Allahabad High Court
SATYAM SINGHversusUNION OF INDIA AND 2 OTHERS
- Decided
- Bench
- MANISH KUMAR NIGAM
Holding
The petition is dismissed as the petitioner has an alternative remedy before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
Summary
The petitioner, Satyam Singh, filed a writ petition challenging the order of the Divisional Manager, Railway, which rejected his claim for a compassionate appointment. The petitioner argued that the rejection was arbitrary and sought judicial intervention. The Union of India contended that the petitioner had an alternative remedy by approaching the Central Administrative Tribunal, as his brother's similar claim had also been rejected. The court held that it was not inclined to interfere, directing the petitioner to avail the alternative legal remedy. Consequently, the petition was disposed of, granting the petitioner liberty to pursue the remedy under law.
Issues considered
- Whether the High Court can intervene in the rejection of a compassionate appointment claim by the railway authorities
- Whether the petitioner has an alternative statutory remedy before the Central Administrative Tribunal
Subjects
- compassionate appointment
- railway
- writ petition
- administrative law
- alternative remedy
- Central Administrative Tribunal
Judgment
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
WRIT - A No. - 15448 of 2026
Satyam Singh
.....Petitioner(s)
Versus
Union Of India And 2 Others
.....Respondent(s)
Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Nitin Kharwar, Ramanuj Yadav
Counsel for Respondent(s) : A.S.G.I., Jai Krishna Narain Sharma
Court No. - 33
HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
2. This petition has been filed challenging the order passed by Divisional
Manager, Railway, rejecting the claim of the petitioner for compassionate
appointment.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the Union of India has submitted that
the petitioner has alternative remedy of approaching the Central
Administrative Tribunal as the brother of the petitioner was railway
employee and his candidature for compassionate appointment has been
rejected by the railway authorities.
4. In view of the above, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter.
5. Accordingly, this petition is disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to
avail the remedy as available to him under law.
(Manish Kumar Nigam,J.)
September 24, 2026
Ved Prakash
Digitally signed by :-
VED PRAKASH SHARMA
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
Checking your session…