^p / tf^, i IN THE HIGH COURTOFCHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (S) N0. S8^\ /2009 . PETITIONER :Nuwas Kindo S/o Late Pritam Kindo Aged about 50 years Working as TTI, CTI Office, SEC Railway, BUaspur (C.G) Versus 1-1 T'f~*l RESPONDENTS .^c/ ^ ••''ciy\0.-' ; ^^/ . A €/ ^ 2) UNIONOFINDIA Through The; General Manager South Eastern Central Railway, Bilaspur (C.G) The Gentral Administrative Tribunal, Through its Registrar Bench at Bilaspur (CG) 3) Divjsional RailWayManager, DRM Qffice, Railway Settlement SEC Railway, Bilaspur (C.G) 4) Sr Divisional Personnel Officer DRM-OfRceComplex, | Personnel BranGh,SEG Rly, | Bilaspur. 5)' Sr Divisional Comml. Managen SECRIy, Bilaspyr. 6) M.k.Naik Aged about35 years WorKing as ChiefTicket lns|jeiGtc>r; CTI Office, SEC Rly, Bilaspur.i IM 13M w ISA na Ir. :'^1 -m WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THE GONSTITUTION OF INDIA FOR ISSUANCE OF A SUITABLE WRIT ORDER OF DIRECTION TO DO JUSTICE IN THE MATTER. w^^ HIGH COURT OF CHHATT1SGARH AT BILASPUR WRTT^ETmON (Sl N0, .5861 of2009 Nuwas Kindo.. VERSUS Union oflndia & Olfaers. WRIT PETITION UNDER ARTICLE 226 OF THECQNSTITm'IQNOF_MDIA Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agsiihotri & Hoa'ble Sliri Radhe Shyam Shanna, JJ. Shri Sanjay Patel, Advocate for the petitioner. Ms. Nausliina Afrin Ali, Advocate for the res{ .5. ntNo. 1.3,4 ORDERfORAL) (Passed oa 02na day ofAugust, 2011) Chailenpe before the Central Admmistfative Tribunal (for short 'the Tribunal') was to fhe office order dated 19.12.2007 (Annexure P/4) whereby the provisional list of Travellers Ticket Inspectors was prepared for considering fhem for promotion to the post of ;ket Inspector. Shri Patel, leamed counsel appeariag for the petitioner submits fhat during pendency ofthe application before the Tribunal, a fmal list of Chief Ticket Inspectors was issued on 31.01.2008 (Annexure V!9) which was aot broiight before (he Tribunal and the Tribunal passed fhe order dated 21.09.2009 (Amiexure P/l) on ttie basis of the impuened provisional list dated 19.12.2007 (Am-iexure P/4). Sliri Patel lurther submits fhat since new cause ofaction has arisen as the same was aot under challenge before the Tribunal, the 1' 5. petitioner may be permitted to question the legality and validity of the final list ofChiefTicket Inspector. Ms. Ali, leamed counsel appearing for fiie respondent/Railway submits thaf even iffhe fmal list is challenged tfae eflect would be one and the same. Be fhat as it may, since a subsequent cause of action has arisen which could not be challenged or broueht on record before the Tribunal, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to take recourse to the Tribunal to challenge the final list ofChief Ticket Inspectors, if so advised. It is made clear that the observations made ia tfae order passed by the Tribunal may not be taken mto consideration while deciding the subsequent challenge, ifany, on merit in accordance willi law. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of Sd/- Satish K. Agnihotri Judge Sd/- ^•swtwa ""judSe Aimt