Dr. Balendra Prasad Sinha Vs The Union of India — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

Dr. Balendra Prasad Sinha Vs The Union of India — Patna HC (2024) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Writ application disposed of with directions: petitioner to submit fresh representation with supporting documents to respondent no. 2 within two weeks; respondent no. 2 to consider the case after affording personal hearing or through counsel and to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter, remaining liable for non-compliance within the stipulated period.

Issue for consideration

Disposal of the writ arising from the petitioner's unanswered 2021 representation before the Chairman, Railway Board — whether to direct a fresh representation and consideration thereof with a reasoned, speaking order.

Court's answer

The petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation before respondent no. 2 (Chairman, Railway Board) along with all supporting documents within two weeks.

Ratio / Principle

Respondent no. 2 is well advised to consider the petitioner's case after affording an opportunity of personal hearing or through his counsel, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter.

Key takeaways

Respondent no. 2 shall be held liable for non-compliance of the Court's order within the stipulated period.ratio¶20

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Patna High Court, Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 2998 of 2022, oral order dated 26-09-2024 of Anjani Kumar Sharan, J (single-member bench). Petitioner Dr. Balendra Prasad Sinha had submitted a detailed representation to the Chairman, Railway Board in 2021 which remained unanswered. Without adjudicating substantive merits, the Court directed the petitioner to file a fresh representation with all supporting documents within two weeks, and directed respondent no. 2 (Chairman, Railway Board) to consider the case after affording an opportunity of personal hearing or through counsel, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter, holding respondent no. 2 liable for non-compliance within the stipulated period. The writ application was disposed of accordingly. No statute or precedent was cited.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.2998 of 2022

======================================================

Dr. Balendra Prasad Sinha son of Sri Ambika Singh resident of Vivekanand Colony, Sanchipatti, Ward No.- 7, at, P.S. and District Hajipur, Vaishali

... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Union of India Ministry of Railway, through the Chairman, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, Raiseena Road, New Delhi- 110001.

The Chairman, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, Raiseena Road, New Delhi110001.

The Zonal Office, E.C. Railway, Hajipur, through its General Manager.

The General Manager, E.C. Railway, Zonal Office, Hajipur.

The Divisional Railway Manager, E.C. Railway, Sonpur.

... ... Respondent/s

======================================================

Appearance : For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sivendra Kishore, Sr. Adv. Mr. Saroj Kumar For the Respondent/s : Mr. Krishna Nandan Singh, ASG Mr. Alok Kumar, CGC ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN ORAL ORDER

5 26-09-2024 Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior counsel for the respondents.

At the very outset, learned Senior counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier the petitioner has filed a detailed representation before the Chairman, Railway Board in year 2021, but till date no order has been passed by the concerned authority.

Considering the aforesaid facts, the petitioner is directed to file a fresh representation before the respondent no. 2 along with all supporting documents within a period of two

Patna High Court CWJC No.2998 of 2022(5) dt.26-09-2024 2/2

weeks and the respondent no. 2 is well advised to consider the case of the petitioner after affording opportunity of personal hearing or through his counsel and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks thereafter.

It is made clear that the respondent no. 2 shall be held liable for non-compliance of this order within the stipulated period.

With the aforesaid direction, the writ application

stands disposed of.

(Anjani Kumar Sharan, J)

anand/-

U