CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.2443 OF 2008 SUKRA, S/O- LATE ASHARFI, RETIRED SENIOR GANGMAN UNDER SE/P WAYS/S. DEO IN THE KATIHAR DIVISION, N.F. RAILWAY, PRESENTLY RESIDING AT VILLAGE-SARDARGACHI MEENAPUR, POLICE STATION-BALIA BELOUN, P.S.- SALMARI, DISTRICT- KATIHAR. ----------------Petitioner Versus 1. UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH THE GENERAL MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, HAVING HEADQUARTERS AT MALIGAON, GUWAHATI. 2. NORTH FRONTIER, HEADQUARTER AT MALIGAON, GUWAHATI THROUGH ITS GENERAL MANAGER. 3. THE DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, N.F. RAILWAY, KATIHAR DIVISION, KATIHAR. 4. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL PERSONNEL OFFICER, N.F. RAILWAY, KATIHAR DIVISION, KATIHAR. 5. THE DIVISIONAL ENGINEER-II, N.F. RAILWAY, KATIHAR DIVISION, KATIHAR. 6. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER (I), N.F. RAILWAY, KATIHAR DIVISION, KATIHAR. 7. S.E./P. WAYS/S/BOE, N.F. RAILWAY, KATIHAR DIVISION, KATIHAR. 8. THE RAILWAY BOARD, RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI THROUGH ITS SECRETARY. ------------Respondents For The Petitioner :Mr. Prashant Kumar Kashyap, Advocate For The Respondents :Mr.. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.K.KATRIAR THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KISHORE KUMAR MANDAL S.K. Katriar, J & Kishore K. Mandal, J This writ petition is directed against the order dated 14.7.2005 (Annexure-1), passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna, in O.A. No. 494 of 2004 (Sukra versus Union of India & Ors), whereby the original application preferred by the present petitioner has been rejected, and the 2 amount paid to him by way of salary and emoluments beyond his age of superannuation has been directed to be refunded/adjusted against his post-retiral benefits. 2. We have perused the materials on record and considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties.. The petitioner had joined the railway service on 20.11.1964. He reached the age of superannuation on 31.12.1997, notwithstanding which he continued to function and draw salary. The respondent authorities served letter dated 30.3.2000 (Annexure-2), on the petitioner informing him that he ought to have superannuated w.e.f. 31.12.1997, and yet he had continued in service. He was, therefore, directed to hand over charge forthwith. The petitioner challenged the same by preferring O.A. No. 520 of 2002, which was disposed of by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, whereby he was permitted to submit appropriate representation before the authorities. The same has been rejected by the order dated 8.10.2002 (Annexure-3), and it has been directed that the petitioner shall refund a sum of Rs. 1,55,478/-, being the salary and emoluments drawn by him beyond the age of superannuation. The learned Tribunal has held that the petitioner was responsible for his over-stay as a government servant beyond the age of superannuation. 3. We are in agreement with the view taken by the Tribunal. No material has been brought to our notice to take a 3 different view. The writ petition is dismissed. Patna High Court Dated 26th February, 2010 NAFR/pkj (S.K. Katriar, J.) ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )