TAPEN SEN,J. - (1.) Heard Mr. Achin Kr. Majumder, learned Counsel for the Petitioner and Mr. Bidyut Kr. Roy, learned Counsel for the South Eastern Railway administration.
(2.) Learned Counsel for the Petitioner submits that this case is covered by the ORDER dated 16.12.2011 passed in W.P. No. 24028 (W) of 2009 (Nitendra Nath Das and others v. Union of India and others). Learned Counsel for the Petitioner has produced a photocopy of the Order and the same reads as follows : JUDGEMENT_236_LAWS(CAL)2_2012_1.html After some arguments, Mr. Achin Kr. Majumder, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners stated that since an identical matter has been decided by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench at Ranchi in OA No. 84/2006 with OA No. 136/2006, he may be allowed to withdraw the Writ petition giving liberty to the Petitioners to approach the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, S.E. Railway, Kharagpur (Respondent No. 5) and request him to consider the case of the Petitioners in the light of the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal referred to above and which was passed on 6.12.2008. Mr. Saptarshi Roy, learned Counsel for the South Eastern Railway however, points out that in so far as alternative appointments of medically unfit candidates are concerned, a Circular of the Railway Board dated 28.7.2010 is already in existence and which says that such cases can be considered provided there was acute shortage of staff in the alternative posts. Taking into consideration the aforementioned submissions, this Writ Petition is disposed of as withdrawn giving liberty to the Petitioners to approach the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, South Eastern Railway referred to above with a direction upon him that he will consider the cases of the Petitioners individually in the light of the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal referred to above as well as after duly considering the aforementioned Circular of the Railway Board and also any other Circular or Circulars that may be in existence as on date. The said officer is directed to pass a reasoned Order in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made above within a period of eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order after giving an opportunity of hearing to the Petitioners. Let it be recorded that this Order has been passed in terms of the submissions of Mr. Majumder and it should be construed to be an adjudication on the merits of the claims of the Petitioners by this Court. The Writ Petition stands disposed of. The Order of the Central Administrative Tribunal as produced by Mr. Majumder is directed to be retained with the records of this case. If urgent certified copy of this Order, duly photocopied, is applied for by the parties, the same should be given expeditiously. Tapen Sen, J."
(3.) Let photocopy of the Order produced in Court be retained with the records of this case.;