HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1760/2025 West Central Railway Employees Union, Having Its Registered Office At Kota Through Its General Secretary Mukesh Galav S/o Shri Hansraj Galav, Aged About 59 Years, R/o 43, Royal Town, Pashu Chikitsalya Ke Samne, Kherli, Kota-324001. ----Petitioner Versus 1. The Union Of India, Through Secretary, Ministry Of Railways, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi. 2. Chairman, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. General Manager, West Central Railway, Indra Market, Jabalpur. 4. Deputy Chief Personnel Officer (Industrial Relation), General Managers Office, Western Central Railway, Head Quarter Office At Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh. 5. Divisional Railway Manager (Personnel), Western Central Railway, Kota Junction, Kota. 6. West Central Railway Mazdoor Sangh, Through Its General Secretary, Shri Ashok Sharma, Having Its Office At Opposite Neelambari Officer Rest House, Jabalpur Station, Madhya Pradesh- 482001. ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Manoj Kumar Bharadwaj Mr. Prakash Kumar Jha For Respondent(s) : Mr. Sumit Teterwal Mr. Swadeep Singh Hora JUSTICE ANOOP KUMAR DHAND Order 27/05/2025 1. The instant writ petition has been preferred with the following prayer: (2 of 4) [CW-1760/2025] “a) Letter No.WCR/Headquarter/501/IR/Secret Ballot-2024 dated 17.12.2024; Letter No.WCR/P-Kota/520/IR dated 18.12.2024 and Letter No.WCR/P-Kota/520/IR dated 26.12.2024 issued by the respondents may kindly be quashed and set aside by this Hon'ble Court and the respondents may kindly be directed not to take any coercive action against the petitioner and further to restore back the facilities to the petitioner-Union forthwith which were being provided to it before issuance of above letters; and/or b) the respondents may kindly be directed to provide similar treatment which was provided by them to Bhartiya Railway Mazdoor Sangh vide letter dated letter No.2024/E(LR)III/LR/FAC/03 dated 16.01.2025 and the petitioner may also be provided atleast those facilities which have been provided to Bhartiya Railway Mazdoor Sangh vide above letter, so as to enable the petitioner-Union to raise the grievances of railway employees. c) Heavy and exemplary cost may kindly be imposed on the respondents and the same may kindly be awarded to the petitioner as the respondents forced the petitioner to file the writ petition.” 2. By way of filing of this writ petition, a challenge has been led to the impugned orders dated 18.12.2024 and 26.12.2024 passed by the respondents. 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the respondents has taken an objection about maintainability of this writ petition. Counsel submits that with regard to similar prayer, the petitioner approached this Court on earlier occasion by way of filing S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.416/2025 and the same was decided by this Court vide order dated 15.01.2025. Counsel submits that the said writ petition was withdrawn by the (3 of 4) [CW-1760/2025] petitioner on instructions to avail the appropriate remedy available under the law for redressal of its grievance. 4. Counsel for the petitioner submits that after passing of aforesaid order, a detailed representation has been submitted by the petitioner before the Railway Authorities on 20.01.2025, but in-spite of passing of considerable time, when the said representation was not decided, no option was available with the petitioner, except to approach this Court again for redressal of its grievance, hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is warranted. 5. This Court is afraid of entertaining the successive petition with regard to the same prayers which were made by the petitioner in the earlier round of litigation. Once the earlier petition submitted by the petitioner has been dismissed granting liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy available under the law for redressal of its grievance, the successive petition is not maintainable on this count alone. 6. Looking to the fact that a representation has already been submitted by the petitioner before the Railway Authorities and the same is lying pending for its adjudication on merits, this Court deems it just and proper to issue directions to the Railway Authorities to decide the said representation within a period of two weeks, by passing a reasoned and speaking order. 7. For a period of three weeks, the interim order passed by this Court shall remain in currency. (4 of 4) [CW-1760/2025] 8. With the aforesaid observations/directions, the instant writ petition stands disposed of. The stay application and all pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (ANOOP KUMAR DHAND),J KuD/108