CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.14430 OF 2005 ***** In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ***** 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, through General Manager, East Central Railway, Hazipur. 2. The Divisional Railway Manager, Sonpur Division, East Central Railway, Hazipur. 3. The Divisional Commercial Manager, Sonpur Division, East Central Railway, Hazipur. .... Petitioners. Versus 1. PIYUSH RANJAN, son of Shri Sachida Nand Tiwari, resident of Mithapur ‘B’ area, Post- G.P.O., P.S. Jakkanpur, District- Patna. 2. The Registrar, Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna. ......Respondents. ----------- For the Petitioners: Mr. Parshuram Singh, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. S.K. Bariar, Advocate. ***** P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHIR KUMAR KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL ****** S.K. Katriar, J. This writ petition is directed against the order dated 21.4.2005, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, in O.A. No.504 of 2004 (Piyush Ranjan Vs. The Union of India and others), whereby the original application preferred by respondent no.1 herein has been allowed, and the respondent authorities have been restrained from recovering a sum of Rs.38,807/-, from the original applicant for the alleged clandestine sale of railway tickets. 2 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties. The original applicant was at the relevant point of time posted as Senior Commercial Clerk at Barauni Railway Station. He was served with show-cause notice dated 24.6.2004 (Annexure-R/3 to the counter affidavit herein), calling him upon to explain as to why a sum of Rs.38,807/- be not recovered from him for misuse of his position as Senior Commercial Clerk with respect to sale of railway tickets. The original applicant had shown cause by his communication dated 11.7.2004 (Annexure-R/4). Even before the ink of his signature on the cause shown was dry, he rushed to the learned Tribunal by preferring the present original application. The cause was shown on 11.7.2004, and the original application was filed on 20.7.2004. We are equally surprised to note that the Tribunal entertained the original application and disposed of the same on merits in a situation where the authorities were yet to deal with the issue. The Tribunal should have directed the authorities to pass a final order supported by reasons within a fixed period. It is common knowledge that clandestine sale of railway tickets has assumed alarming proportions in the Railways and has to be firmly dealt with. 3. In the result, we allow this writ petition, set aside the order dated 21.4.2005 (Annexure-1), passed by the learned Tribunal, and direct the appropriate authorities to dispose of the matter on 3 merits by a reasoned order. In view of the position that the original applicant is entirely responsible for rushing to the Tribunal without allowing the authorities to deal with the matter, he shall be liable to costs at the rate to be determined by the authorities and if cause shown by him is rejected. (S K Katriar, J.) Kishore K. Mandal, J. I agree. (Kishore K. Mandal, J.) Patna High Court, Patna. Dated the 12th day of May, 2010. S.K.Pathak/ (NAFR)