Tuesday, 19, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Kaushar Neyazi @ Md. Kaushar Neyazi vs The Union Of India
2025 Latest Caselaw 3371 Patna

Citation : 2025 Latest Caselaw 3371 Patna
Judgement Date : 21 April, 2025

Patna High Court

Kaushar Neyazi @ Md. Kaushar Neyazi vs The Union Of India on 21 April, 2025

Author: P. B. Bajanthri
Bench: P. B. Bajanthri
         IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
                          Letters Patent Appeal No.1695 of 2019
                                            In
                      Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.16079 of 2019
     ======================================================
1.    The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Ha-
      jipur, District- Vaishali.
2.   The Divisional Rail Manager, Sonpur Division, East Central Railway, Ha-
     jipur, District- Vaishali.
3.   The Station Manager, Begusarai Station, District- Begusarai.

                                                                     ... ... Appellants
                                          Versus

     Dilip Kumar Mahato, Son of Rampreet Mahato, resident of Ward no. 7, Vil-
     lage- Baro, Rajdeopur, Police Station- Barauni, District- Begusarai.

                                                              ... ... Respondent
     ======================================================
                                        with
                   Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2171 of 2020
     ======================================================
     Kaushar Neyazi @ Md. Kaushar Neyazi, Son of Md. Sultan, Resident of Vil-
     lage- Phulwaria, Ward No. 4, P.O.- Barauni, P.S.- Barauni, District- Be-
     gusarai.
                                                                 ... ... Petitioner
                                       Versus

1.   The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, ha-
     jipur, District- Vaishali.
2.   The Divisional Rail Manager, Sonpur Division, East Central Railway, Son-
     pur, District- Saran.
3.    The Station Manager, Barauni Junction, District- Begusarai.
                                                               ... ... Respondents
     ======================================================
     Appearance :
     (In Letters Patent Appeal No. 1695 of 2019)
     For the Appellant/s       :       Mr. Alok Kumar Agrawal, Sr. CGSC, UOI
     For the Respondent/s :            Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma, Advocate
     (In Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2171 of 2020)
     For the Petitioner/s      :       Mr. Rakesh Kumar Sharma
                                       Mr. Alok Anand, Advocate
     For the Respondent/s :            Mr. Anand Kumar Ojha, Sr. Advocate (UOI)
     ======================================================
     CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI
             and
             HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S. B. PD. SINGH
     ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P. B. BAJANTHRI) Patna High Court L.P.A No.1695 of 2019 dt.21-04-2025

Date : 21-04-2025

The appellants have assailed the order of the

learned Single Judge dated 25.11.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No.

16079 of 2019.

2. Respondent - Dilip Kumar Mahato, who was

allotted space on the platform of Begusarai Railway Station

measuring of 5X6 to Public telephone booth. Having regard to

the technology, PCO Booth is not feasible to run in the Railway

Platform, resultantly, he intends to switch over to any other

business. Such change of business policy is not existing with the

Appellant - Railway, therefore, Appellant is not entitled to

convert the aforementioned PCO Booth purpose to that of any

other purpose. Purely it is policy decision of the Appellant-

Railways. No doubt, Respondent is 60% disabled person and he

had a continuous business for about 24 years. The Railway

Authorities, at the best, they can give preference to the

Respondent as and when notice inviting application from the

eligible candidates for any other business is called for and

preference/priority shall be given. If such relaxation provision is

not there, the same shall be examined by the Railway

Authorities - Appellant. To this extent, the Appellant has made

out a case so as to interfere with the order of the learned Single

Judge dated 25.11.2019 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 16079 of 2019.

Patna High Court L.P.A No.1695 of 2019 dt.21-04-2025

Accordingly, it is modified in the above term.

3. Accordingly, the present L.P.A. No.1695 of 2019

stands disposed of. Pending I.As, if any, stands disposed of.

Ref: Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2171 of 2020

4. Heard C.W.J.C. No. 2171 of 2020.

5. Petitioner -Kaushar Neyazi @ Md. Kaushar

Neyazi case is similar to the L.P.A. No. 1695 of 2019 decided

today in the case of The Union of India Versus Dilip Kumar

Mahato. Whatever the observation made in the aforementioned

decision stands applicable to the present case.

6. The concerned Railway Authorities are hereby

directed to examine and redress the grievance of the petitioner

on par with Dilip Kumar Mahato for the future tenders.

7. Accordingly, C.W.J.C. No. 2171 of 2020 stands

disposed of. Pending I.As, if any, stands disposed of.

(P. B. Bajanthri, J)

( S. B. Pd. Singh, J) manish/-

AFR/NAFR                NAFR
CAV DATE                NA
Uploading Date          24.04.2025
Transmission Date       NA
 

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter