Petitioner sought employment on a Class-IV railway post claiming inheritance of father's license. Court dismissed the application, holding that late fee deposit cannot validate the license transfer retroactively. Order was quashed.
The order dated 26.05.2017 passed in O.A. No. 816/2013 is affirmed and the current writ application is dismissed.
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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.13443 of 2017
=========================================================== Abhay Kumar, S/o Late Mithilesh Ram @ Mithilesh Prasad, Resident of VillageKutbanchak, P.O.- Jamanganj, P.S.- Makhdumpur, District- Jehanabad (Bihar).
.... .... Petitioner
Versus
.... .... Respondents
=========================================================== Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Ranjeet Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Akash Keshav, Advocate Mr. Yash Mathur, Advocate
=========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI And HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 06-11-2017
Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the Railways, and having gone through the records and the pleadings, we do not feel that the order dated 26.05.2017 passed in O.A. No. 816/2013 is required to be interfered with.
It is evident that the petitioner, with the object of deriving benefit of employment on a Class – IV post, hurriedly made deposits of the license fee in a lump sum manner after the announcement was made and an effort was made to create a picture that he was regular Coolie duly licensed which is
Patna High Court CWJC No.13443 of 2017 dt.06-11-2017
2
inherited from his father.
The order of transfer of the license of his father in the favour of petitioner would have become valid provided the requisite fee would have been deposited by the petitioner. The offer has to be completed by acceptance since it was not done at the relevant time, a subsequent conduct of depositing the same will not have the effect of relating back to the previous order of transfer but will relate to from the date the license fee was deposited, if at all.
The Tribunal, therefore, has rightly dismissed the O.A. application as no case in favour of the petitioner is made out for a direction to consider of his case for employment on Class-IV post as he cannot be said to be a valid license holder of a Coolie.
This application is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)
(Rajeev Ranjan Prasad, J.)
Rajeev/-
| AFR/NAFR | NAFR |
|---|---|
| CAV DATE | NA |
| UploadingDate | 07.11.2017 |
| Transmission Date | NA |
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner can be considered a valid license holder for Class-IV post employment despite late deposit of license fees.
Whether the Tribunal correctly dismissed the Order Application directing reconsideration of the petitioner's case for employment.
Whether the transfer of license from a deceased father falls on the son immediately or only upon fee payment.
Abhay Kumar
The Union of India through the Chairman, Railway Board
The General Manager, East Central Railway
The Divisional Railway Manager, Mughalsarai
The Senior Divisional Commercial Manager Mughalsarai
Ajay Kumar Tripathi
Rajeev Ranjan Prasad
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
