Gauhati High Court
MFA/177/2017 of SMTI JAYANTI DAS Vs THE UNION OF INDIA on 15 June 2026
GAHC010051772017 2026:GAU-AS:8616 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : MFA/177/2017 SMTI JAYANTI DAS W/O LATE DHIREN DAS, R/O VILL. PIJUPARA, P.O. and PS. NAGARBERA, DIST. KAMRUP R, ASSAM, PIN VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY
GAHC010051772017
2026:GAU-AS:8616
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : MFA/177/2017
SMTI JAYANTI DAS
W/O LATE DHIREN DAS, R/O VILL. PIJUPARA, P.O. and PS. NAGARBERA, DIST. KAMRUP R, ASSAM, PIN
VERSUS
THE UNION OF INDIA
REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, NORTH EAST FRONTIER
RAILWAY, MALIGAON, GUWAHATI-11, DIST. KAMRUP M, ASSAM.
Advocate for the Petitioner : MR.M HOSSAIN, M. BORUAH,MR N ALAM,MR. P
MAZUMDER,MR. S CHAUHAN,MR.M RAHMAN,MR. M A SHEIKH
Advocate for the Respondent : MR. B SARMA, C.G.C.,SC, NF RLY
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KAUSHIK GOSWAMI
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.
ORDER
Date : 16.06.2026 Heard Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel appearing for the appellant. Also heard Mr. B. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, NF Rly, appearing for the respondent.
2. By way of this application filed under Section 23 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, the appellant is assailing the impugned order dated 03.04.2017 passed by the Members, Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench in Claims Application No. O.A. IIU-26/2013 (Old) Claim Application No. OA (IIU)/Ghy/2013/0059 (New), whereby the said O.A. was dismissed.
3. It is submitted by Mr. S. Chauhan, learned counsel for the appellant, that the impugned judgment in the instant case has been delivered by only Member (Judicial) of Railway Claims Tribunal sitting singly. However, there is no indication as to whether any authorization for same was granted under Section 4(4) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, in this regard. He also submits that the judgment of the Railway Claims Tribunal has to be delivered by a Bench of two members in pursuant to the provisions contained in Section 4(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, and the only deviation in that regard may be done if authorization under sub-section (4) of Section 4 is given by the Chairman to any Member to take up the matter sitting singly. He submits that as in the instant case no such authorization was there, the impugned judgment is liable to be set aside on that ground only. He further submits that upon setting aside the matter may be remanded back to the Railway Claims Tribunal for deciding the matter afresh after complying with the provisions of Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987.
4. Mr. B. Sarma, learned Standing Counsel, NF Railway, also agrees to the submissions made by the learned senior counsel for the appellant and submits that the matter may be remanded back.
5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties and having noted that the statute clearly provides for the contingency in which a single member of Railway Claims Tribunal can take up the cases for adjudication; however, since said provision, namely, Section 4
(4) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, has not been complied with in the instant case, the impugned order is liable to be set aside on the ground of lack of jurisdiction by a single member of the Railway Claims Tribunal.
6. Pertinent herein that the Coordinate Bench of this Court in the case of Smti Arati Paul Choudhury v. The Union of India, in MFA/217/2019 by Order dated 21.05.2026, and Ms. Kaushalaya Das v. The Union of India, in MFA/209/2019 by Order dated 23.04.2026, have similarly, upon setting aside the orders passed by the Single Member of the Railway Claims Tribunal, remanded the same to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, for a fresh adjudication.
7. Accordingly, the impugned order dated 03.04.2017 is set aside.
8. The matter is remanded back to the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, with a direction to constitute a bench in terms of Section 4 of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987, and to dispose of the same after affording the opportunity of being heard to both the parties.
9. Considering that the matter has been pending since 2017, the Railway Claims Tribunal, Guwahati Bench, is directed to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
10. The Registry shall immediately send back the records of the Original Application requisitioned in connection with this appeal along with a copy of this order to the Railway Claims Tribunal for compliance.
11. The appeal is accordingly disposed of.
JUDGE Comparing Assistant