Facts
The applicants’ land was acquired by the Railways for the Deshpran-Nandigram Special Railway Project
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5Applicant No. 1, having received a land loser certificate, applied for compassionate appointment for his son (Applicant No. 2) under the land loser category pursuant to Railway Board Circular RBE 99 of 2010
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5Following a lack of response from the authorities, Applicant No. 1 submitted a formal representation dated 02.06.2025
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5Claiming the representation remained unconsidered, the applicants filed the present Original Application (OA) seeking a direction for the issuance of appointment call letters, alongside a Miscellaneous Application (MA) for joint prosecution
Source reference: p. 2, para. 3-5Issues
Whether the respondents are obligated to consider and decide upon the applicants' pending representation for appointment under the land loser quota in accordance with prevailing circulars and judicial precedents
Source reference: p. 3, para. 9Law Applied
Railway Board’s Circular RBE 99 of 2010, dated 16.07.2010, which governs appointments for land losers
Source reference: p. 2, para. 5Legal principles settled by the Hon’ble High Court at Calcutta in Union of India & Ors. v. Jahangir Chowdhury & Ors. (WPCT 28 of 2021) and Union of India & Ors. v. Chandi Das Khan & Ors. (WPCT 75 of 2020)
Source reference: p. 3, para. 6Rule 4(5)(a) of the CAT (Procedure) Rules regarding joint prosecution
Source reference: p. 2, para. 4Reasoning
The Tribunal observed that the applicants sought a limited and "innocuous" relief, specifically requesting the disposal of their pending representation rather than an immediate adjudication on the merits of their eligibility
Source reference: p. 3, para. 9The respondents raised no objection to the request for a time-bound consideration of the representation as per the existing rules
Source reference: p. 3, para. 7The Tribunal determined that the administrative authorities must evaluate the claim by treating the OA as part of the representation and applying the ratios established by the Calcutta High Court in Jahangir Chowdhury and Chandi Das Khan, which addressed similar claims under the land loser category
Source reference: p. 3, para. 9The Tribunal explicitly refrained from commenting on the merits, leaving all points open for administrative determination
Source reference: p. 4, para. 10Holding
The Tribunal allowed the MA for joint prosecution and disposed of the OA with a direction to the competent authority to consider the representation dated 02.06.2025
The respondents are mandated to issue a reasoned and speaking order within four months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, taking into account the cited High Court judgments and the Tribunal's previous order in OA/350/319/2021
Source reference: p. 3, para. 9No order as to costs was made
Source reference: p. 4, para. 11Original Court PDF
SK AJANUR RAHAMANvsSOUTH EASTERN RAILWAY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in