Prem Sagar Dubey Vs Union of India And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

Prem Sagar Dubey Vs Union of India And Ors. — Jharkhand HC (2026) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

Issue for consideration

Whether the writ application (seeking reversal of the Railway Protection Force disciplinary punishment orders and release of the petitioner's promotion kept in abeyance) should continue to be prosecuted, given that no counsel appeared for the petitioner and the record indicated loss of interest in the case.

Court's answer

The Court dismissed the instant writ application for non-prosecution, having found that no counsel appeared for the petitioner and that, from the record, the petitioner had lost interest in the case long before; accordingly the writ application is dismissed for non-prosecution.

Ratio / Principle

Pending interlocutory application(s), if any, connected with the dismissed writ application also stand closed.

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

W.P. (S) No. 6368 of 2011, High Court of Jharkhand at Ranchi (Judge Deepak Roshan; decision dated 13.02.2026). Petitioner Prem Sagar Dubey had sought setting aside of: (i) the disciplinary authority's (Respondent No. 4, Divisional Security Commissioner, RPF, Dhanbad) order dated 28.02.2008 which differed with the enquiry officer's findings and awarded punishment of stoppage of increment for the next two years with cumulative effect (arising out of Charge Sheet no.PF/DHN/(8)-10/05/506 dated 2/4.08.2005; Annexure 4); (ii) the appellate authority's (Respondent No. 3) order dated 30.10.2008 reducing the punishment to withholding of increment temporarily (Annexure 6); and (iii) the revisional authority's (Respondent No. 2) non-interfering order dated 26.08.2009 (Annexure 7). He further sought promotion to Inspector, Railway Protection Force pursuant to the selection order dated 31.05.2010, whose implementation Respondent No. 1 (Union of India, Ministry of Railway / Railway Board) had kept in abeyance by its order dated 1/3-4/4-2011 (Annexure 12). No counsel appeared for the petitioner and the Court found from the record that he had lost interest; the Court therefore dismissed the writ application for non-prosecution and closed pending interlocutory application(s), if any. No statute or precedent case was invoked; no substantive legal issue was adjudicated. Mrs. Bakshi Vibha, Advocate appeared for the respondents; petitioner side had no counsel ('None').

2026:JHHC:4076

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

W.P. (S) No. 6368 of 2011

Prem Sagar Dubey, Son of Sri Hanumanth Dubey, resident of 205 Shubh Aprajetta Appartment, Nandan Puri P.O.-Khajpura, P.S.Rajeev Nagar, Dist.- Patna(Bihar). ...... Petitioner

Versus

The Union of India, Ministry of Railway, Railway Board, through, the Director General, Railway Protection Force, Rail Bhawan P.O. & P.S.- Parliament Street, New Delhi.

The Chief Security Commissioner, (Railway Protection Force), East Central Railway Hazipur, P.O. Hazipur, P.S. Hazipur, District- Vaishali, Bihar.

The Deputy Chief Security Commissioner, (Railway Protection Force) RPF, East Central Railway, P.O. Hazipur P.S. Hazipur District- Vaishali Bihar.

The Divisional Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force East Central Railway, Dhanbad, P.O. Dhanbad, P.S. Sadar, District- Dhanbad. ..... Respondents

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK ROSHAN

For the Petitioner(s) : None For the Respondent(s) : Mrs. Bakshi Vibha, Advocate

15/Dated:-13.02.2026

1. The instant writ application has been preferred by the

petitioner praying therein for the following relief:

“For the issuance an appropriate writ's order, direction, setting aside the order dated 28.02.2008 whereby the respondent no.4 -cum- disciplinary authority has passed an order in connection with Charge Sheet no.PF/DHN/(8)-10/05/506 dated 2/4.08.2005 whereby differing with the findings of the enquiry officer has awarded a punishment to the petitioner for stoppage of the increment for the next two year with cumulative effect (Annexure 4) as also the order dated 30.10.2008 passed in Appeal by the Respondent no.3 -cum-Appellate Authority whereby and whereunder he has modified the order of punishment to the extent that the punishment granted to the petitioner has been reduced to with holding of increment temporarily (Annexure 6) as also the order dated 26.08.2009 (Annexure 7) passed by the Revisional authority, the respondent no.2 who has not interfered with the order of the Appellate Authority. The petitioner prays for the further direction upon the respondents to forthwith grant to him promotion in terms of the order dated 31.05.2010 whereby he has been selected for promoted to the post of Inspector Railway Protection Force and to further set aside the order of the respondent no.1 dated 1/3-4/4-2011, (Annexure 12) whereby his order of promotion has been kept in abeyance in view of the orders as contained in Annexure 4, 6 and 7.”

2. None appears for the petitioner. From record, it

appears that the petitioner has lost interest in this case long

1

2026:JHHC:4076

before.

3. Looking to the prayer made in this writ application, it appears that the petitioner is not interested in pursuing this matter; accordingly, the instant writ application is dismissed for non-prosecution.

4. Pending I.A., if any, also stands closed.

(Deepak Roshan, J.)

February 13, 2026 vikas/uploaded 11.03.2026

2