1 2026:CGHC:16612 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 3166 of 2026 1 - Yashvant Kumar Kashyap S/o Shri Ganga Prasad Kashyap Aged About 37 Years Office Assistant In Adee/ Project, Secr. Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. R/o Village And Post- Kosmanda, Tahsil- Champa, District Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh. --- Petitioner(s) versus 1 - South East Central Railway Through The General Manager Secr Bilaspur District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 2 - Chief Administrative Officer (Construction) Personnel Branch, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 3 - Assistant Divisional Electrical Engineer (Op) South East Central Railway, Bilaspur District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 4 - Shri Sandeep Chaubey Chief Loco Inspector, In The Office Of Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Op), Secr, Bilaspur Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 5 - Assistant Personnel Officer (Con) South East Central Railway, Bilaspur Chhattisgarh. 6 - Collector District Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh. 7 - Sub Divisional Officer (Revenue) And Land Acquisition Officer Champa, District- Janjgir- Champa Chhattisgarh. BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN Digitally signed by BALRAM PRASAD DEWANGAN 2 8 - Ramnarayan S/o Late Chhedilal Track Maintainer Bijuri Railway Station District- Anupapur Chhattisgarh. 9 - Ramkhilawan S/o Bodhiram Helper Grade-Ll, Wrs, Raipur, District, Chhattisgarh. --- Respondent(s) (The cause title is taken from CIS system) For Petitioner : Mr. Yogesh Chandra Sharma, Advocate For Respondents No.1 to 5 : Mr. Ramakant Mishra, DSGI with Ms. Shweta Rai, Advocate For Respondents/State : Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Govt. Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Parth Prateem Sahu Order On Board 10/04/2026 1. Learned counsel for respondents No.1 to 5 raises an objection with regard to maintainability of the writ petition on the ground that petitioner is employee of South East Central Railway, therefore, petitioner is having remedy to file appropriate proceedings before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against the grievance as raised in the writ petition. 2. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that this writ petition is filed because according to his instructions, Division Bench is not functioning in the CAT as one of the member is not there, however, perusal of the proceedings/documents enclosed would show that petitioner has not filed any proceedings before the CAT along with application for urgent hearing. 3 3. At this stage, learned counsel for petitioner seeks permission of this Court to withdraw this writ petition with liberty to file appropriate proceedings before the CAT. 4. In view of the above submission made by learned counsel for petitioner, this writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn with the liberty as prayed for. Sd/- (Parth Prateem Sahu) Judge Balram