Patna High Court
Madhav Mishra vs General Manager E.C. Railway on 22 February, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 5150 of 2020
======================================================
Madhav Mishra, Son of late Pandit Yasod Anand Mishra, Resident of Village
and Post Office Kherajpur, P.S. Bahadurpur, District- Darbhanga.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. General Manager E.C. Railway P.O. Hazipur, District- Vaishali at Hazipur.
2. Divisional Railway Manager E.C. Railway, Samastipur, P.O. and District-
Samastipur.
3. Divisional Railway Manager (Personnel), E.C. Railway, Samastipur.
4. Divisional Commercial Manager, E.C. Railway, Samastipur, District-
Samastipur.
5. Divisional Accounts Officer, E.C. Railway, Samastipur, District- Samastipur.
6. Senior Traffic Inspecting /Accounts, E.C. Railway, Samastipur, District-
Samastipur.
... ... Respondent/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Amarendra Narayan, Advocate
For the Respondent/s : Mr. Naresh Dikshit, Sr. Panel Counsel Railways
Mr. Ramadhar Shekhar (Addl. S.C. Railway)
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
and
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN KUMAR JHA
ORAL JUDGMENT
(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI)
Date : 22-02-2023
Despite our order dated 08.02.2023, Respondent-
Railways could not produce the relevant records in order to
appreciate how the alleged charge of misappropriation was
proved in the Departmental Enquiry. Mr. Ratan Rakesh Lakra,
Patna High Court CWJC No. 5150 of 2020 dt.22-02-2023
Divisional Personnel Officer, Samastipur Railway Division,
who has filed counter-affidavit is present in the Court. He fairly
submitted that before filing counter-affidavit, he has been
authorized and when he approached the concerned Section/
Department in seeking records at that relevant point of time
itself, the concerned Section/Department have expressed that
records are not available. At this juncture, learned counsel for
the respondent seeks time. Relist this matter after two weeks for
production of original records insofar as Departmental Enquiry
initiated and completed against the petitioner, subject to
payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/-cost shall be remitted in the
High Court Legal Services Authority within a period of two
weeks, for the reasons that petitioner is aged about 75 years and
writ petition is of the year 2020.
2. At this stage, learned counsel for the Respondent-
Railways submitted that the matter may be heard and decided on
merits.
3. Petitioner is a retired Station Master. He has attained
age of superannuation and retired from service on 31.08.1995.
Due to non-settlement of D.C.R.G. he was compelled to
approach Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna
(for short 'CAT') in filing O.A. No. 124 of 2009. In the Original
Patna High Court CWJC No. 5150 of 2020 dt.22-02-2023
Application he has sought for the following reliefs:-
"Applicant is entitled for the following relief
after taking into accounts the facts and
circumstances stated above the applicant
entitled for.
(A) That the order dated 16-07-2008
respondent authority so far it relates to
withholding the D.C.R.G. of the applicant
may be quashed being arbitrary and which
is against the service, jurisprudence, and
against the natural justice.
(B) That the respondent authority may be
directed to pay D.C.R.G. Amount Rs.-
91711.00 by this applicant without any
further delay.
(C) The applicant is fully entitled to receive
the D.C.R.G With the penal interest under
the provision of Rule 87 of Railway service
and pension rule 1993.
(D) That the applicant is fully entitled to
previous suit cost and present suit cost,
harassment and mental torture etc.
(E) That the any other relief and relief's may
be granted to this applicant which Hon'ble
Tribunal deems to fit."
4. The petitioner has assailed the order of the CAT dated
26.02.2014 passed in M.A. No. 460 of 2013 arising out of O.A.
No. 124 of 2009 and M.A. 453 of 2013.
5. The petitioner's O.A. No. 124 of 2009 was dismissed
for non-prosecution on 27.03.2009, consequently M.A. No.
460 of 2013 was filed for restoration. So also M.A. No. 453 of
2013 was filed for condonation of delay for filing restoration
Patna High Court CWJC No. 5150 of 2020 dt.22-02-2023
petition. In the delay application it is stated that petitioner has
engaged a lawyer from Darbangha Bar, but he did not appear
on the date of hearing, in the result O.A. was dismissed. In this
backdrop the petitioner was not aware of dismissal of O.A.
Thereafter, he contacted Advocate on Record and came to
know about dismissal of O.A. for non-prosecution. CAT did
not find the explanation of delay in filing the restoration
petition to be satisfactory further as none appeared even on
12.11.2013 and 26.02.2014, accordingly both the Misc.
Application were dismissed for default.
6. The matter could have been remanded to the CAT on
the score that for no default on the part of the petitioner, his
M.A. No. 460 of 2013 and M.A. No. 453 of 2013 were
dismissed.
7. Perusal of the records, it is evident that petitioner is
aged about 77 years when the present writ-petition was filed,
therefore, we are of the view that it is not a case for remanding
the matter to the CAT.
8. In order to resolve the issue and non-cooperation of the
respondent in apprising this Court about imposition of penalty
and not providing material relating to Departmental Enquiry
which was stated to be hurdle in disbursement of D.C.R.G.
Patna High Court CWJC No. 5150 of 2020 dt.22-02-2023
amount which was due to the petitioner, in the absence of any
records, one cannot come to the conclusion that withholding of
D.C.R.G of the petitioner indefinitely is correct. Therefore, the
concerned respondent is hereby directed to settle the
petitioner's D.C.R.G. amount along with the interest at the rate
of 8 % and settle the matter within a period of three months
from the date of receipt of this order.
9. The petitioner is entitled to interest on belated
settlement of D.C.R.G, in the light of the Apex Court in the
case of Vijay L. Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. and Ors. reported
in (2001) 9 SCC 687.
10. In the event of non-settlement of D.C.R.G. which is
due to the petitioner along with interest within the time limit
stipulated, the petitioner is entitled to litigation cost and it is
quantified at Rs. 50,000/-, for the reasons that he had attained
age of superannuation and retired from service on
31.08.1995. He has approached CAT in the year 2009,
thereafter, the present writ-petition is filed in the year 2020. It
is made clear that petitioner is not entitled to interest prior to
three years from the date of filing original application before
CAT, he is entitled to interest on D.C.R.G. amount from
15.01.2006 till payment is made. In this regard necessary
Patna High Court CWJC No. 5150 of 2020 dt.22-02-2023
calculation shall be made and disbursed.
11. Accordingly writ-petition stands disposed of.
(P. B. Bajanthri, J)
( Arun Kumar Jha, J)
Himanshu/
Daya/-
AFR/NAFR NAFR
CAV DATE NA
Uploading Date 27.02.2023
Transmission Date NA
