^' ^y .} .<^&€--- ^0?""" n |ltvltlon *. ^ F^.i fitoil ,tn 2.CTT5 ,<**' IN HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WRIT PETITION (s( N0^ OF 2008 ^ PETmON UNDER ARTICUE 226/227 OFCONSTITUTION OFINDIA. ^f- PETITIONERS 1. Union of India fhrough General Manager, South Eastem Cenfiral Railway, G.M. Office, BiMspur, District Bilaspur (CG) 2. Assistant Personnel OflBcer (Recrultment), South Eastern C-entral Railway, BUaspi.lr, Disll. BUaspui- (CG) RESPOHDEKT VERSUS Tamal Kumar Basu S./o T.K. Basu, Agcd about 36 ycars, R/o Railway Qiiarter No. 166/B, Bliilai-3, Distt. Durg(CG) (Candidate) ,I«'J&'.*&1 ."i ."•^s <;,-' Jf.' HIGH COIJRT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR PETITIONERS RESPONDENT (Candidate) WRIT PETITION ('S) N0. 2591 of2008 Union oflndia & Anofher. VERSUS Tamal Kumai' Basu. PETITIQN UNDER ARTICLE 226/227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA Coram : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri & Hon'ble Shri Radhe Shyam Shamia, JJ. Present: Shri Abhishek Sinha, Advocate for the petitioners. Shri B.P.Rao, Advocate for fhe respondent. ORDERfORAL) (Passed on 15ilt day ofJune, 2011) •l. Challenge in this petition is to the order dated 28.11.2007 (Annexure P./l) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (.for short 'fhe Tribunal), Jabalpur, Bench Circuit Court sitting at Bilaspur, in O.A. No. 773/2006, whereby on a clear adniission of the petitioners/Railways i.e. tlie respondent before tiie Tribunal, that due to some clerical mistake, ttie applicant (respondent herein) was wrongly infbmied that his application was rejected as he does not beloiig to geographical jurisdiction of ex-Bilaspur and there was no mention of his application being not in fhe prescribed format or that a demaiid draft/Indian Postal Order had not been enclosed. 2. On considermg the cleai- mistake admitted by the petitioners/RaiIways, the Tribunal allowed the application ofthe respondent herein with a direction to the petitioners/Railways to ;<t <. 2 hold supplementary exatnination for fhe respondent/applicant within a period oftliree months from the date ofreceipt ofa copy of this order. Thereagainst, the instant petition was prefeired before this Comt This Court, on 17.6.2008, while admitting the petition stayed the effect and operation of the impugned order dated 28.11.2007 (Annexure P/l) passed by the Tribunal. On query, it is not clear asto whether the appointments on the available vacant posts were made after the impugned order was passed on 28.11.2007 or during pendency ofthe matter before the Tribunal. Tlius, no flnding on this aspect can be recorded. Having considered the facts situation of the case and having pei-used the impugned order, vve do not find any in-egularity, illegality m the impu^ied order passed by the Tribunal. Thus, no interference is warranted. ' In view offhe above, the writ petition is dismissed. No order asto costs. 8. Interim reliefgranted on 17.06.2008, is vacated- Sd/- . SatishK.Agnihotn =-|^^.;:Ju(tee,,' Sd/- R.S. SUarma Judge Amif