D.R. Deshmukh vs Union Of India
2022 Latest Caselaw 5910 Chatt

                                     1

                                                                    NAFR

             HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

                       Writ Appeal No. 22 of 2021

D.R. Deshmukh S/o C. R. Deshmukh Aged About 50 Years Working as
Head Constable Railway Protection Force, Presently Posted In Wagon
Repair Shop (WRS) Raipur (Unit No-9902227), R/o Kanhaiyapuri,
Kasaridih, Police Chauki- Padmnabhpur, Police Station Durg, Civil and
Revenue, District- Durg (C.G.)

                                                           ---- Appellant

                                 Versus

1.   Union of India Through Secretary Department of Railway, (Railway
     Board) Mantralaya, New Delhi.

2.   Chief Security Commissioner Railway Protection Force (R.P.F.),
     South Eastern Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G.)

3.   Divisional Security Commissioner        Railway   Protection   Force
     (R.P.F.), SEC Railway, Raipur (C.G.)

4.   Assistant Security Commissioner South Eastern Central Railway,
     Bilaspur (C.G.)

                                                       ---- Respondents

(Cause-title taken from Case Information System)

For Appellant : Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, Advocate.

For Respondents : None.

Hon'ble Shri Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

Hon'ble Shri Justice Deepak Kumar Tiwari, Judge

Judgment on Board

Per Arup Kumar Goswami, Chief Justice

21.09.2022

Heard Mr. Arvind Shrivastava, learned counsel for the appellant.

2. None appears for the respondents.

3. This writ appeal is presented against an order dated 14.12.2020

passed by the learned Single Judge in Writ Petition (S) No. 5145 of 2020,

whereby, the writ petition, which was filed challenging an order of

transfer, was dismissed.

4. The petitioner was working as Head Constable, Railway Protection

Force (RPF), Wagon Repair Shop (WRS), Raipur and he was transferred

to Nagpur/SECR Division.

5. It is submitted by Mr. Shrivastava that a departmental proceeding

was initiated against the petitioner for not joining the place of posting and

the said departmental proceeding has culminated in passing of an order

of compulsory retirement.

6. The appeal preferred and the revision filed were also dismissed.

7. It is submitted by Mr. Shrivastava that the petitioner contemplates to

challenge the aforesaid orders in appropriate forum.

8. Having regard to the above submission of Mr. Shrivastava, we are

of the opinion that there is no surviving cause of action in this appeal and

accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

                         Sd/-                                     Sd/-
                  (Arup Kumar Goswami)                    (Deepak Kumar Tiwari)
                      Chief Justice                             Judge



Brijmohan