Research › Search › Judgment

High Court of Chhattisgarh · body

2026 DAILYLAW 20962 (CHH)

PRATIBHA SAKHARE v. UNION OF INDIA

WPS/4432/2026 · 2026-05-25

Shri Narendra Kumar Vyas

body2026

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

1 2026:CGHC:23493 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 4432 of 2026 Pratibha Sakhare W/o Shri B. Ishwar Rao Aged About 49 Years Presently Posted As Chief Reservation Supervisor At Railway Station Uslapur South East Central Railway Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - Union Of India Through- Secretary Ministry Of Railway Rail Bhawan New Delhi 2 - Divisional Railway Manager South East Central Railway Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 3 - Additional Divisional Railway Manager (Op) South East Central Railway Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager Divisional Railway Manager Office South East Central Railway Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 2 5 - Sr. Divisional Personnel Officer South East Central Railway Personnel Department Divisional Railway Manager Office Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 6 - Divisional Personnel Officer Personnel Department Divisional Railway Manager Office South East Central Railway Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 7 - Assistant Personnel Officer - I I I Personnel Department Divisional Railway Manager Office South East Central Railway Bilaspur District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Rajeev Kumar Dubey, Advocate For Union : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI Hon’ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas Order on Board 26/05/2026 1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India challenging the order dated 25.02.2026 passed by the respondent no. 7/Assistant Personnel Officer- III, Personnel Department, Divisional Railway Manager Office, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, whereby the petitioner has been transferred from Uslapur to Raigarh. 2. The Central Government in exercise of power conferred under Section 14 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 has issued notification confirming jurisdiction with regard to service dispute to the Central Administrative Tribunal, therefore, the writ petition is not maintainable before this Court, however, liberty is 3 granted to the petitioner to take remedy available to him under the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. 3. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of with aforesaid liberty granted in favour of the petitioner. Sd/- (Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE Madhurima