Railway authorities challenged a CAT order directing review of promotions per M.Nagaraj. The High Court held no positive promotion direction was issued; re-examination must await disposal of pending Supreme Court proceedings on the relevant Office Memoranda. Writ petitions disposed of with that observation.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015 etc., and batch
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 25.11.2024
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.JOTHIRAMAN
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015, 26145 of 2016, 27070, 27071, 27173, 27182, 27186 of 2017, 2514, 2515, 2516, 2615, 2616, 3335, 3336 of 2018, & 3337 of 2018
and
M.P.Nos.1,1 of 2015,
W.M.P.Nos.22429 of 2016, 28886, 29027, 29041, 28885, 29051 of 2017, 3232, 3233, 3067, 3068, 3069, 4076, 4077, 4078 & 4079 of 2018
W.P.No.3334 of 2018
... Petitioner
Vs.
Page 1 of 6
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015 etc., and batch
Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying for the issuance of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records of the order dated 25.11.2016 passed by the first respondent Tribunal in O.A.No.521 of 2015 and quash the same.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Radhakrishnan Senior Counsel for Mr.M.Vijay Anand
For Respondents : R1 - Tribunal R2 - No apperance
COMMON ORDER
(Order of the Court was made by S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. )
A batch of writ petitions have been instituted challenging the common order of the Central Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A.Nos.516 to 524 of 2015 and batch.
Page 2 of 6
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015 etc., and batch
Page 3 of 6
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015 etc., and batch
Hon'ble Supreme Court of India, all necessary actions are to be taken by the
writ petitioners/Railways.
With the above observations, all the Writ Petitions stand disposed of . No
costs. Consequently connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.
[S.M.S., J.] [M.J.R., J.]
25.11.2024
Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order veda
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 4 of 6
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015 etc., and batch
To
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 5 of 6
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 27703 & 30779 of 2015 etc., and batch
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND M.JOTHIRAMAN, J.
veda
W.P.Nos.3334 of 2018, 3337 of 2018, 26145 of 2016 etc., and batch
25.11.2024
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis Page 6 of 6
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal's direction to re-examine railway promotions in light of M.Nagaraj could be complied with while related matters were pending before the Supreme Court.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
M.Nagaraj & Others vs. Union of India & OthersReferred¶5
M.Nagaraj & Others vs. Union of India & Others dated 19.10.2006
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Union of India Represented by the General Manager, Southern Railway
The Divisional Personnel Officer, Tiruchirappalli Division, Southern Railway
The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench
S.Shaik Saleem
S.M.Subramaniam
M.Jothiraman
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
