ASHISH KUMAR TIWARI vs SOUTH WESTERN RAILWAY on 15 October 2026

O R D E R

Per: Mr.Kumar Rajesh C learned counsel for the pe al Government Standing C ndents. resent Contempt Petition has iance of the order passed b 51/2026. arned counsel for the petitio der in OA, that was subject m

ATIVE TRIBUNAL , PATNA

o. 050/00151/2026 Date of order:- 15.10.2026 M CHANDRA, MEMBER [A] F SHYAM SUNDER TIWARI, UNDER SENIOR SECTION WESTERN RAILWAY, ANAGARA (KARNATAKA), PO- MAHDAH, PS- ITARHI, AR).

………Petitioner s IPAL CHIEF MECHANICAL RAILWAY, RAIL SOUDHA, CT- HUBBALLI-580020 ……..Respondent . Dixit, Advocate Thakur, ld. Sr. CGSC __________________ R (Oral) Chandra, Member (A): etitioner and learned Senior Counsel appearing for the been instituted alleging non- by this Tribunal in O.A. No. ner has fairly submitted that matter of initiation of this CP

, N , , , r L , t r e - . t P Digitally signed by POOJA KUMARI POOJA KUMARI

Patna Bench was to order, appear directi

4. Thus, with t implem It is w concer ( (

5. At the Contem provid by a B (Conte

6. The pr that th and th The pr o decide the representation b has already been compli ring for the respondents has ions of this Tribunal have been on the basis of the submissi heir consent, there is no su mentation of the order passed well settled that the jurisdictio rned with

(a) “securing compliance of (that can also be seen under the Administrative Tribunals

(b) examining whether “th disobedience of the order e same time, this Tribunal is mpt of Courts (CAT) Rule des that every proceeding for Bench of not less than two M empt of Courts) Rules, 1992 is “Rule 6: Taking cognizan contempt shall be dealt w than two Members: Provided where the contem committed in view of, p Member/(s), the same sh Member/(s) in accordance w resent order is confined to rec he order under contempt has herefore, no further procee resent order does not underta by a speaking and reasoned ied with. Learned counsel also confirmed that the said n duly complied with. ions made by both sides and urviving grievance regarding d in the Original Application. on in contempt is essentially f the order of the Tribunal” r the provisions of section 27 of s, Act); and here has been willful r of the Tribunal”. s conscious of Rule 6 of the es, 1992, which ordinarily contempt shall be dealt with Members. Rule 6 of the CAT s being reproduced as under: nce.-Every proceeding for with by a Bench of not less mpt is alleged to have been presence or hearing of the hall be dealt with by the with section 14 of the Act”. cording the admitted position s already been complied with eding is being conducted. ake any adjudication upon the d l d d g . y ” f l e y h T r s n e e n h . e Digitally signed by POOJA KUMARI POOJA KUMARI

Patna Bench merits of guil issue a

7. In the solely Memb in an withou

8. Rule 2 to that

9. The H on 14 Writ Tirtha Shukl has clo order useful pendin

10. It is and cir to an e constru s of the allegation of contempt lt or exoneration of any alleg any substantive or coercive dir e circumstances, requiring th for the purpose of placing bers, when no further proceed unnecessary prolongation o ut serving any purpose other t 24 of the CAT (Procedure) Rul t is being reproduced as under “24. Order and directions i may make such orders or g necessary or expedient to prevent abuse of its proce justice.” Hon'ble Supreme Court of 4th February 2025 in Con Petition (Civil) NO. 477 ankar Basu & Ors. Petiti la Verma & Ors. Alleged C osed contempt proceedings a under contempt had been purpose would be served b ng. s accordingly considered appr rcumstances of the present c end at this stage. Nothing con ued as adjudication upon t, does not record any finding ged contemnor, and does not rection. he matter to remain pending g it before a Bench of two ding is required, would result of the adjudicatory process than wastage of time. les, 1987 may also be referred r: in certain cases. The Tribunal give such directions as may be give effect to its order or to ess or to secure the ends of f India in an order passed ntempt Petition (Civil) in 7/2021 in the matter of ioner(s) Versus Nivedita Contemnor/Respondents after being satisfied that the complied with and that no by keeping the proceedings ropriate, in the peculiar facts ase, to bring the proceedings ntained in this order shall be n any allegation of willful g t g o t s d l e o f d n f a s e o s s s e l Digitally signed by POOJA KUMARI POOJA KUMARI

Patna Bench disobe beyond contem

11. In view in the accord compli

12. No ord

pk/- edience, nor as an expressio d the fact that the directions mpt have already been compli w of the aforesaid position, no e present Contempt Petition dingly, dropped as having bec iance of the order. Notices sta der as to costs.

C.P. No. 050/0061/2026 on of opinion on any issue contained in the order under ied with. o further proceedings survive . The Contempt Petition is, come unnecessary in view of and discharged. (Kumar Rajesh Chandra)

Member (A)

e r e , f

Digitally signed by POOJA KUMARI POOJA KUMARI