SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Chh) 15592

IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
DIBAKAR DUTTA – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
WPS/3939/2026



##PAGE1##

1

SYED

ROSHAN

ZAMIR

ALI

2026:CGHC:23065-DB

Digitally

signed

by SYED AFR

ROSHAN

ZAMIR

ALI

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR

WPS No. 3939 of 2026

1. Dibakar Dutta S/o Late Putiram Dutta Aged About 60 Years

(Presently Aged About 70 Years) Retired Pointman Under

C.Y.M./ Bijuri/secr R/o Vivekanand Colony Ward No.1

Chanawariband Manendragarh Distt- Koriya (C.G.) 491442

... Petitioner

versus

1. Union of India Through- General Manager South East Central

Railway Bilaspur Zone Headquarters Office Bilaspur (C.G.)

495004

2. The Divisional Railway Manager South East Central Railway

Bilaspur (C.G.) 495004

3. The Senior Divisional Operations Manager S.E.C. Railway

Bilaspur (C.G.) 495004

4. The Chief Mining Adviser Railway Board Dhanbad (Bihar)

... Respondents

For Petitioner : Mr. A.V. Shridhar, Advocate

For Respondents : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, Dy. Solicitor General along

with Mr. Neeraj Baghel, Advocate

##PAGE2##

2

DB: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Parth Prateem Sahu,J

& Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sachin Singh Rajput, j

Order on Board

Per Parth Prateem Sahu, J

14.05.2026

1. Petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking following reliefs:-

“10.1.That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be

pleased to call for entire records pertaining to

the case of the petitioner.

10.2. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased

to quash the impugned order dated 12.08.2025

passed in O.A. No.203/721/20216by the

Learned Central Administrative Tribunal,

Jabalpur Bench.

10.3. That, this Hon’ble Court may kindly be pleased

to grant relief as claimed by the petitioner in

the O.A. No.203/721/2016.

10.4. Any other relief in the facts and circumstances

of the case which the Hon’ble Court deems fit

and proper may be passed.”

2. Facts of the case, in brief, are that petitioner was appointed in

the Railway Department as Sample Khalasi in the scale of

Rs.196-232/- w.e.f. 20.1.1977 and posted under Chief Mining

Adviser, Railway Board, Dhanbad. In the year 1994, number

of employees, including petitioner herein, were declared

surplus due to winding up of coal organization (closure of

steam loco sheds). Petitioner along with others was screened

##PAGE3##

3

for alternative job in the Railways and was spared for Asansol

Division. Petitioner requested for his absorption against ‘D’

category vacancies in Bilaspur Division, which was allowed

vide order dated 05.12.1994 and he was absorbed in Bilaspur

Division in ‘D’ category in the grade of Rs.740-940/-and

posted as Pointman in Bijuri Station, however, the petitioner

was not allowed the same basic already drawn by him i.e.

Rs.1050/- with allowance. Petitioner submitted representation

before the authority concerned seeking pay protection from

the date of his absorption in Bilaspur Division, w.e.f.

5.12.1994, on the ground that according to instructions

contained in Railway Establishment Board No.129/2022 dated

08.08.20002, after declaring surplus, petitioner ought to have

been redeployed on a special supernumerary post in the

same grade which he was drawing when declared surplus.

Petitioner stood retired from service on 31.5.2015 and his

representation remains undecided. Petitioner approached the

Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench (for short ‘the

Tribunal’), by filing Original Application No.203/721/2016

seeking a direction for respondents to consider his pending

representation and initiate action to protect his pay and

emoluments drawn while being declared surplus and to

recalculate the pension and other retiral benefits within a time

bound period. The Tribunal dismissed the original application

##PAGE4##

4

holding it to be barred by limitation period prescribed under

Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 (for short

‘the Act of 1985’).

3. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that according to REB

No.129/2002, the employees declared surplus are required to

be redeployed by creating a special supernumerary post in

the same grade. Petitioner was declared surplus in the scale

of 800-1150/- and therefore, he could not have been

absorbed in the lower grade of Rs.750-940/- and as such,

present is the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top