ANIL KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

ANIL KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

The rejection of the appellant's claim was contrary to the Railway Board's binding policy circular dated 19 April 2006 because the appellant's entire house was demolished and thus his case fell within paragraph 2 of the circular; accordingly the impugned orders were set aside and the appellant's claim for appointment to a Group 'D' post was to be implemented within two months with age relaxation if required.

Parties
Appellant: Anil Kumar; Respondent: Union of India & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
22 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal No.1958 of 2019 / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Letters Patent Appeal No.1929/2016 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.25313/2013
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned judgment and order set aside
Legal Topics
Policy Circulars, Rehabilitation Employment, Displaced Persons, Mandamus, Age Relaxation
Administrative Law Employment Law Property Law Railways Policy Circulars Rehabilitation Employment Displaced Persons Mandamus +1 more

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anil Kumar

Appellant

Union of India & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal No.1958 of 2019 / Appeal From Division Bench Judgment of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Letters Patent Appeal No.1929/2016 in Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.25313/2013

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Railway Board circular dated 19 April 2006 entitled the appellant to appointment to a Group 'D' post after demolition of his house due to land acquisition for a railway project
  2. 2 Whether the rejection of the appellant's claim was contrary to the terms of the Railway Board policy circulars
  3. 3 Whether mandamus can be issued to enforce employment where a government policy exists

Ratio Decidendi

The rejection of the appellant's claim was contrary to the Railway Board's binding policy circular dated 19 April 2006 because the appellant's entire house was demolished and thus his case fell within paragraph 2 of the circular; accordingly the impugned orders were set aside and the appellant's claim for appointment to a Group 'D' post was to be implemented within two months with age relaxation if required.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned judgment and order set aside

Orders

  • Set aside the impugned judgment and order of the High Court dated 3 January 2018
  • Direct that the appellant's claim for appointment to a Group 'D' post be implemented within two months from the date of the judgment by granting an age relaxation, if required