Calcutta High Court
WP.CT/88/2024 of SANGITA MISTRY Vs UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. on 30 September 2026
SHEET WBCHCA0048422024 Ct. No.1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA Item Nos.D/L.18-34 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION PG APPELLATE SIDE WP. CT / 36 /202 4 UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH GENERAL MANAGER, EASTERN RAILWAY ]Petitioner Versus MD. ISMAIL ] Respondent with WP. CT / 100 /202 4 CHINMAY SARMA
ORDER SHEET
WBCHCA0048422024
Ct. No.1 IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Item Nos.D/L.18-34 CONSTITUTIONAL WRIT JURISDICTION
PG APPELLATE SIDE
WP.
CT
/ 36
/202
UNION OF INDIA, THROUGH
GENERAL MANAGER, EASTERN RAILWAY ]Petitioner
Versus
MD. ISMAIL
] Respondent
with
WP.
CT
/ 100
/202
CHINMAY SARMA
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 102
/202
BUDDHADEB SADHUKHAN
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 135
/202
RADHESHYAM PAL
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
] Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 150
/202
PAWAN KUMAR BURNWAL
]Petitioner
Versus
THE UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 69
/202
MD. ISMAIL
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 81
/202
ABDUL MALEK
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 82
/202
RAJIV KUMAR THAKUR
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 83
/202
ANIMESH ADHIKARY
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 84
/202
MD. HUSSAIN
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 85
/202
SANCHITA ADHIKARY
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS ] Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 88
/202
SANGITA MISTRY
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 89
/202
RAHUL GHOSH
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 92
/202
AJOY PAUL
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 93
/202
BIPLAB GHOSH
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 95
/202
KRISHNA KAMAL SARKAR
] Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
with
WP.
CT
/ 97
/202
RAJ KUMAR RAJ
]Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS
]Respondents
Appearance:
Mr. Kumar Jyoti Tewari, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Amrita Pandey, Advocates…... For the Petitioner/Union of India in WP.CT. 36 of 2024
&
For the Respondents (WP.CT. 100 of 2024, WP.CT. 102 of 2024, WP.CT. 135 of 2024,
WP.CT. 150 of 2024, WP.CT 69 of 2024,
WP.CT. 81 of 2024, WP.CT. 82 of 2024,
WP.CT. 83 of 2024, WP.CT. 84 of 2024,
WP.CT. 85 of 2024, WP.CT. 88 of 2024,
WP.CT. 89 of 2024, WP.CT. 92 of 2024,
WP.CT. 93 of 2024, WP.CT. 95 of 2024,
WP.CT. 97 of 2024
Mr. Ujjal Ray,
Mr. Binit Kumar, Advocates for the Respondents in WP.CT. 36 of 2024
for the Petitioner(s) in WP.CT. 100 of 2024, WP.CT. 102 of 2024, WP.CT. 135 of 2024, WP.CT. 150 of 2024, WP.CT 69 of 2024, WP.CT. 81 of 2024, WP.CT. 82 of 2024, WP.CT. 83 of 2024, WP.CT. 84 of 2024, WP.CT. 85 of 2024, WP.CT. 88 of 2024, WP.CT. 89 of 2024, WP.CT. 92 of 2024, WP.CT. 93 of 2024, WP.CT. 95 of 2024, WP.CT. 97 of 2024.
CORAM
:
RAVINDRA V. GHUGE, CJ.
&
OM NARAYAN RAI, J.
DATE
:
30th SEPTEMBER, 2026.
ORDER (Per Court)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
1. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Union of India indicates that the Petition preferred by the Union of India, is listed at Serial No. 18 (WP.CT. 36 of 2024).
2. The learned Counsel representing the individual workmen, whose Petitions are listed from Serial No. 19 to 34, submits that the Petitioners are persons, who are involved in the same selection process.
3. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the Union of India and the learned Counsel for the individual Petitioners jointly submit that their submissions and contentions are covered and answered by a Judgment delivered by this Court on 23rd September, 2026 in WP.CT. 49 of 2022 (The Union of India & Ors. vs. Babloo Kumar & Ors.). They submit that all these Petitions can be disposed off in view of the analysis and conclusions drawn by this Court in the Judgment delivered in Babloo Kumar (supra).
4. As such, considering the identical aspect in these matters and in the batch of cases decided by this Court in Babloo Kumar (supra), all these Petitions stand disposed off, for the reasons recorded in the Judgment in Babloo Kumar (supra). Pending Civil Applications, if any, stand disposed off. (Om Narayan Rai, J.) (Ravindra V. Ghuge) Chief Justice