Central Administrative Tribunal
AMRESH PRAKASH vs EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY on 27 October 2026
-1- OA/050/00727/2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PATNA BENCH,PATNA
OA/050/00727/2026
Date of Order: 27.10.2026
C O R A M
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, MEMBER (J)
HON’BLE MR. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA, MEMBER (A)
Amresh Prakash, S/o Late Bhanu Prakash, resident of –Lakhni Bigha, P.O.- Khagaul, P.S.- Danapur, District-Patna 801105. At present on being Medically Decategorised from the post of Loco Pilot (Mail/Express), Danapur under orders of Transfer to the post of Sr. Technician at Tilaya.
……..Applicant.
- By Advocate(s): - Shri J.K. Karn
-Versus-
1. The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hajipur-844101.
2. The Principal Chief Personnel Officer, East Central Railway, Hajipur-
844101.
3. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway, Danapur-
801105.
4. The Divisional Railway Manager(P), Danapur Division of East Central Railway-801105.
5. The Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer, Danapur Division of East Central Railway-801105.
6. The Asstt. Personnel Officer, Danapur Division of East Central Railway-801105.
…….Respondents.
By Advocate(s) :- Shri T.N. Thakur, Sr. Standing Counsel
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.
O R D E R
[ORAL] Per Justice Narendra Kumar Johari, J.M.:- Shri J.K. Karn, learned counsel for the applicant is present. Digitally signed by SURYAROOP KABI SURYAR OOP KABI
-2- OA/050/00727/2026
2. Shri T.N. Thakur, ld. Sr. Standing Counsel on receipt of advance copy of O.A. has appeared for the opposite parties.
3. Heard learned counsel for the applicant.
4. At the very outset, learned counsel for applicant submitted that as per statutory provision mentioned under Section-20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 he has to submit representation to the Department, but inadvertently the representation could not be given to the authority concerned for redressal of his grievances. Counsel for the applicant further submitted that as the representation of the applicant dated 30.09.2026 was rejected vide order dated 09.10.2026 (received by applicant on 12.10.2026) which was the basis of the impugned transfer order dated 12.10.2026 (Annexure-A/1) on account of medical decategorisation, he was under impression that he had already exhausted the departmental remedy as his representation was rejected. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that the applicant is going to submit his representation to the department against the order dated 12.10.2026 to express his grievances and if the same is not considered by the authority concerned then in that case the applicant may file OA afresh before this Tribunal. Therefore, with the aforesaid liberty, he may be permitted to withdraw the OA.
5. In view of the prayer made above, the OA is dismissed as withdrawn with aforesaid liberty. Sd/- Sd/- (Kumar Rajesh Chandra) (Justice Narendra Kumar Johari) Member (A) Member(J) Srk. Digitally signed by SURYAROOP KABI SURYAR OOP KABI