IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.11190 of 2009 BINAY KUMAR SHARMA S/o Shivdeo Sharma R/o Village & PO Keshopur District Nalanda at present posted as GDSBPM (under put off duty) PO Keshopur Nalanda Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA through Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry of Communication and Information Technology Department of Postal, New Delhi cum Director General Departments of Posts, New Delhi 2. The Chief Post Master General, Bihar Circle, Patna 3. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Nalanda Division, Biharsharif, Nalanda 4. Sushil Kumar S/o Chandradeo Pandey GDSBPM PO Keshopur, PS Hilsa, Distt Nalanda 5. Sanjay Kumar Sharma S/o Sri Munni Singh GDSBPM PO Baidrabad Distt. Arwal (old Jehanabad) ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. Vinay Kumar Mishra, Advocate For the Union of India: Mr. Sudhir Singh, Asst. S.G of India -------- 2 02-09-2009 Heard the parties. The effect of order dated 6-11-03 passed by the Chief Post Master General, Bihar Circle, Patna was to appoint Sri Sushil Kumar on the post of Extra Departmental Branch Post Master, Keshopur B.O in account with Hilsa S.O under Nalanda Postal Division. As a result the petitioner’s appointment on that post stood terminated. Such decision by the Chief Post Master General was only in compliance of order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 16-1-03 passed in O.A. no. 486/1998 filed by the said Sushil Kumar against action of the respondents in not offering appointment to him but to this petitioner. Admittedly Sushil Kumar was placed no.1 candidate in selection process and petitioner was at serial no.2. Sushil Kumar was not appointed initially on account of allegation that he was involved in a criminal case but since he had been acquitted in the criminal case, the 2 Tribunal granted him relief on 16-1-03 leading to his appointment in place of this petitioner. Since the petitioner was a party in O.A. no. 486/98 and he could not succeed in challenging the order dated 16-1-03 now he cannot succeed against the order dated 6-11-03 which is only a consequential order. Hence, the Tribunal has rightly rejected the case of the petitioner. We find no merit in this writ petition. It is, accordingly, dismissed. If the petitioner has any other grievance relating to claim of salary or compensation for any alleged wrong done to him, that will be a cause of action which was not before the Central Administrative Tribunal and hence, we are not inclined to go into those grievances. If so advised, the petitioner may pursue his remedy in respect of those grievances in accordance with law. BKS/- (Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) (Jyoti Saran, J.)