Dismissed

Rajesh Kumar Patel v. Divisional Railway Manager, S.E.C.R. Nagpur Division, Nagpur and Others

Bombay HC14 Jan 2020WP/238/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged an order for recovery of monthly rent and cancellation of housing allotment by his employer S.E.R.C. The Court held that the petitioner has a remedy in the Central Administrative Tribunal and dismissed the writ petition without determining substantive questions.

What did the court decide?

None granted; petition dismissed with direction to approach Central Administrative Tribunal.

Rajesh Kumar Patel Vs Divisional Railway Manager… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2020)

¶1

914-WP-238-20

¶2

1/2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR.

¶4

WRIT PETITION NO.238 OF 2020

¶5

Rajesh Kumar Patel, Civil Lines, Nagpur

¶6

-vs-

¶7

Divisional Railway Manager, S.E.C.R. Nagpur Division, Nagpur and ors.

¶8

Office notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.

¶9

Court's or Judge's Orders.

¶10

Shri Amit Khare, Advocate for petitioner.

¶11

CORAM : R. K. DESHPANDE AND
 A. S. CHANDURKAR, JJ.
 DATE : January 14, 2020

¶12

The petitioner challenges the order dated 17/12/2019
passed by the South East Central Railway (for short, S.E.C.R)
for recovery of certain dues from the petitioner in relation to
monthly rent of the premises occupied by him.

¶13

The petitioner claims to be an employee of S.E.C.R. but
on deputation with the respondent No.4 Maharashtra Metro
Railways Corporation Limited (Maha Metro). The S.E.C.R. have
cancelled the allotment of quarter to the petitioner and recovery
of rent is sought. Accordingly directions are issued to the
respondent No.4 Maha Metro. It is conceded before us that
unless the order dated 17/12/2019 passed by the S.E.C.R. is
quashed and set aside, no consequential order can be passed
against the respondent No.4 Maha Metro. The petitioner was
enjoying the accommodation in question and recovery of rent is
sought which is the benefit attached to the service conditions of
the petitioner under S.E.C.R. The petitioner has a remedy to
approach the Central Administrative Tribunal for such relief.

¶14

914-WP-238-20

¶15

2/2

¶16

Obviously, if the communication dated 17/12/2019 is quashed
and set aside the respondent No.4 Maha Metro would be bound
by it.

¶17

We permit the petitioner to approach Central
Administrative Tribunal. All questions are left open.
Writ petition is dismissed. No costs.

¶18

 JUDGEJUDGE

¶19

Asmita

Rajesh Kumar Patel v. Divisional Railway Manager, S.E.C.R. Nagpur Division, Nagpur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajesh Kumar Patel v. Divisional Railway Manager, S.E.C.R. Nagpur Division, Nagpur and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Dr. Vandanatai Dhone Nursing School, Akola through Director Dr. Sudhir S. Dhone Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary,Medical Education and Drugs Dept. and Others

Baba Caterers, through Its Proprietor, Shyam Pukharaj Aasopa Vs Commissioner Social Welfare Directorate, Pune and Another

Nathu Gangadhar Rambhad Vs the Deputy Commissioner, Dept. of Customs, Central Excise and Service Tax, Nagpur

Sanjay Naktu Lengure Vs the State of Maharashtra through Secretary, Dept. of School Education and Sports, Mumbai and Others

Sau. Nalini W/O Gajanan Gonnade Vs the Chief Officer, Bhandara Municipal Council,Bhandara

Chetan Hinglas Bharti Vs State of Maharashtra, through Collector, Amravati and 2 Others