Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shri Soumil Singh vs Union Of India on 10 August, 2023
Author: Sujoy Paul
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT JABALPUR
BEFORE
JUSTICE SUJOY PAUL
ON THE 10 th OF AUGUST, 2023
WRIT PETITION No. 2986 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
DUSHYANT KUSHWAHA S/O SHRI NATTHOOLAL
KUSHWAHA, AGED ABOUT 29 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
UNEMPLOYED R/O VILLAGE PURUSHOTTAMPUR, POST
JANAKPUR, DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ABHIGYA VERMA - ADVOCATE )
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF RAILWAY R/O RAIL BHAVAN
RAISINA MARG DISTRICT NEW DELHI (DELHI)
2. JOINT DIRECTOR (LAND AND FACILITY)
RAILWAY BOARD R/O RAILWAY BOARD RAIL
BHAVAN NEW DELHI (DELHI)
3. GENERAL MANAGER WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY
R/O 35 SOUTH CIVIL LINES DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER
(PERSONAL) DRM OFFICE AT DRM RD R/O
BENGALI COLONY N-2 HABIBGANJ BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER R/O REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPENDRA YADAV - ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL))
WRIT PETITION No. 2989 of 2023
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
2
BETWEEN:-
SHUBHAM RAIKWAR S/O SHRI BHAGWAT PRASAD
RAIKWAR, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, R/O WARD NO. 1
VILLAGE TIKURIYA MOHALLA PANNA, DISTT PANNA
(M.P.)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ABHIGYA VERMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF RAILWAY R/O RAIL BHAVAN
RAISINA MARG DISTRICT NEW DELHI (DELHI)
2. JOINT DIRECTOR(LAND AND FACILITY)
RAILWAY BOARD, NEW DELHI R/O RAILWAY
BOARD RAIL BHAVAN NEW DELHI (DELHI)
3. GENERAL MANAGER, WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY
R/O 35, SOUTH CIVIL LINES, DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY
MANAGER(PERSONAL) DRM OFFICE AT DRM RD
R/O BENGALI COLONY N-2 HABIBGANJ BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER R/O REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPENDRA YADAV - ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL) )
WRIT PETITION No. 3465 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
BRIJ KISHORE MISHRA S/O SHRI KESHAV PRASAD
MISHRA, AGED ABOUT 33 YEARS, OCCUPATION:
UNEMPLOYED R/O VILLAGE PISHTHA TEHSIL
AJAYGARH, DISTRICT- PANNA (M.P.)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ABHIGYA VERMA - ADVOCATE )
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
3
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRRETARY
MINISTRY OF RAILWAY R/O RAIL BHAVAN
RAISINA MARG DISTRICT NEW DELHI (DELHI)
2. JOINT DIRECTOR ( LAND AND FACILITY)
RAILWAY BOARD R/O RAILWAY BAORD RAIL
BHAVAN NEW DELHI (DELHI)
3. GENERAL MANAGER WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY
R/O 35 SOUTH CIVIL LINES DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER
(PERSONAL) DRM OFFICE AT DRM RD R/O
BENGALI COLONY N-2 HABIBGANJ BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE AND ALND
ACQUISITION OFFICER R/O REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPENDRA YADAV - ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL))
WRIT PETITION No. 3480 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SHRI RAJEEV KUMAR DEY S/O RAVINDRA NATH DEY,
AGED ABOUT 25 YEARS, OCCUPATION: UNEMPLOYED
R/O VILLAGE AND POST OFFICE JUMUNHAI POST
OFFICE PANNA DISTRICT PANNA (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ABHIGYA VERMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF RAILWAY R/O RAIL BHAVAN
RAISINA MARG DISTRICT NEW DELHI (DELHI)
2. JOINT DIRECTOR (LAND AND FACILITY)
RAILWAY BOARD R/O RAILWAY BOARD RAIL
BHAVAN NEW DELHI (DELHI)
3. GENERAL MANAGER WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
4
R/O 35 SOUTH CIVIL LINES DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER
(PERSONAL) DRM OFFICE AT DRM RD R/O
BENGALI COLONY N-2 HABIBGANJ BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER R/O REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER PANNA (MADHYA
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPENDRA YADAV - ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL))
WRIT PETITION No. 3503 of 2023
BETWEEN:-
SHRI SOUMIL SINGH S/O SHRI BEER SINGH, AGED
ABOUT 24 YEARS, R/O GRAM ALHA POST
SHAYAMARDADA, TEHSIL GUNNUR DISTRICT- PANNA,
M.P. (MADHYA PRADESH)
.....PETITIONER
(BY SHRI ABHIGYA VERMA - ADVOCATE)
AND
1. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH SECRETARY
MINISTRY OF RAILWAY R/O RAIL BHAVAN
RAISINA MARG DISTRICT NEW DELHI (DELHI)
2. JOINT DIRECTOR (LAND AND FACILITY)
RAILWAY BOARD R/O RAILWAY BOARD RAIL
BHAVAN NEW DELHI (DELHI)
3. GENERAL MANAGER WEST CENTRAL RAILWAY
R/O 35 SOUTH CIVIL LINES DISTRICT JABALPUR
(MADHYA PRADESH)
4. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER
(PERSONAL) DRM OFFICE AT DRM RD R/O
BENGALI COLONY N-2 HABIBGANJ BHOPAL
(MADHYA PRADESH)
5. SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER R/O REVENUE AND LAND
ACQUISITION OFFICER PANNA (MADHYA
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
5
PRADESH)
.....RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI PUSHPENDRA YADAV - ASSISTANT SOLICITOR GENERAL)
T h is petition coming on for orders this day, t h e cou rt passed the
following:
ORDER
Heard.
Shri Abhigya Verma, learned counsel for the petitioners in these batch of
petitions fairly submits that claim of the petitioners is regarding an appointment /
employment in Railways and in batch of matters Coordinate Benches of this
Court have issued direction for consideration of representation.
The payer is opposed by Shri Pushpendra Yadav, learned ASG.
This Court considered this aspect in WP No. 4909 of 2023 ( Ashish
Patel Vs. Union of India) and passed the following order :-
"Heard.
Learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that in lieu of
land acquired by Railway Administration, the petitioner deserves
appointment as per the policy. He submits that appointment
needs to be given by Railway Administration. Shri Awasthy,
learned Senior counsel relied upon certain single Bench orders
of this Court wherein representations were directed to be
decided.
The petitioner is claiming appointment/employment in Railway
Administration.
A conjoint reading of Section 3(q) read with Section 14 of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, in the opinion of this Court,
the remedy avaialble before the Central Administrative Tribunal.
The Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in the case of L.
Chandra Kumar Vs. Union of India reported in (1997) 3 SCC
261 opined as under :-
"93. Before moving on to other aspects, we may summarise
our conclusions on the jurisdictional powers of these
Tribunals. The Tribunals are competent to hear matters where
the vires of statutory provisions are questioned. However, in
discharging this duty, they cannot act as substitutes for the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
High Courts and the Supreme Court which have, under our
constitutional set-up, been specifically entrusted with such an
obligation. Their function in this respect is only
supplementary and all such decisions of the Tribunals will be
subject to scrutiny before a Division Bench of the respective
High Courts. The Tribunals will consequently also have the
power to test the vires of subordinate legislations and rules.
However, this power of the Tribunals will be subject to one
important exception. The Tribunals shall not entertain any
question regarding the vires of their parent statutes following
the settled principle that a Tribunal which is a creature of an
Act cannot declare that very Act to be unconstitutional. In
such cases alone, the High Court concerned may be
approached directly. All other decisions of these Tribunals,
rendered in cases that they are specifically empowered to
adjudicate upon by virtue of their parent statutes, will also be
subject to scrutiny before a Division Bench of their
respective High Courts. We may add that the Tribunals
will, however, continue to act as the only courts of first
instance in respect of the areas of law for which they have
been constituted. By this, we mean that it will not be
open for litigants to directly approach the High Courts
even in cases where they question the vires of statutory
legislations (except, as mentioned, where the legislation
which creates the particular Tribunal is challenged) by
overlooking the jurisdiction of the Tribunal concerned."
(Emphasis supplied)
In view of this binding Constitution Bench judgment, the Court
of first instance for service matters is the Central Administrative
Tribunal and high Court is not obliged to act as a Court of first
instance. Thus, the petition is not maintainable and Single
Bench orders passed by other Benches in ignorance of
Constitution Bench Judgement are not binding on this
Court.
The petition is disposed of by reserving liberty to the petitioner
to approach the tribunal.
CC as per rules."
In view of aforesaid order and judgment of Constitutional Bench of
Supreme Court in L. Chandra Kumar Vs. Union of India reported in (1997)
3 SCC 261, these petitions cannot be entertained.
The petitions are dismissed by reserving liberty to approach the
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
appropriate forum / Tribunal.
(SUJOY PAUL)
JUDGE
sarathe
Signature Not Verified
Signed by: NAVEEN KUMAR
SARATHE
Signing time: 8/11/2023
2:08:13 PM
