IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.2005 of 2004 PARMANAND PRASAD, S/O- LATE GORAKH PRASAD, R/O- VILLAGE BELWA, P.O.- & P.S. ADAPUR , DISTRICT EAST CHAMPARAN Versus 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE CHAIRMAN, RAILWAY BOARD-CUM-SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, GOVT OF INDIA, RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI. 2. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI. 3. THE CHIEF SECURITY COMMISSIONER, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, E.C. RAILWAY, HAJIPUR. 4. THE DIVISIONAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER, RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE, E.C. RAILWAY, SONEPUR ----------- 7. 18.02.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. Petitioner is aggrieved by communication dated 11th of December, 2003 as contained in Annexure- 16 indicating that his Revision Application has been rejected in terms of letter dated 19th of November 2003, addressed to the Chief Security Commisisoner, Railway Protection Force, E.C. Railway, Hajipur. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that in view of this courts order dated 18th of April, 2003 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 12910 of 2002 as contained in Annexure-14 that the Revision Application shall be disposed of as per direction of this court within a period of 3 months from the date of filing of the same, - 2 - petitioner filed a detailed Revision Application on 9th of June 2003 as contained in Annexure-15. However, the Revision Application was dismissed by cryptic order assigning no reason without application of mind, without even taking any notice of the facts of the case and without considering the points raised by the petitioner. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of respondent-railway is not in a position to support the order passed on the Revisional Application vide Annexure- 16/1 in absence of any details of the case mentioned in the above order. Considering the submission of the parties and on perusal of the letter dated 11th of December, 2003 enclosing the letter of rejection of the Revision Application vide letter dated 19.11.2003 as contained in Annexure-16 and 16/1 respectively, it would appear that nothing has been considered by the Revisional Authority nor even noticed the relevant facts of the Revision Application and has nothing said except one line order that “the revision application is rejected”. In my opinion, such order cannot be sustained in law and as such, the communication rejecting the revision application as contained in Annexure-16 and 16/1 is hereby quashed and the matter is remitted back to the Revisional Authority to pass - 3 - reasoned order afresh in accordance with law dealing with the points raised by the petitioner in his Revision Application as contained in Annexure-15 expeditiously, preferably within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a certified copy of the present order. The order passed by the Revisional Authority shall be communicated to the petitioner by post under registered cover with A.D. The writ application is accordingly disposed of with the above observations/directions. Jagdish/- (Shailesh Kumar Sinha,J)