Dilip Kumar Majhi v. The Union of India

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRASAD For the Petitioner For the UOI 02/Dated:05th May, 2026 ---------- : Mr. Shadab Bin Haque, Advocate : Mr. Aaryaman Relan, Advocate : Mr. Prashant Vidyarthy, Sr. P.C : Mr. Romit Kumar, Advocate ----------- The instant writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, directed against the order dated 16.01.2026 passed by the ‘Central Administrative Tribunal’ Patna Bench, Circuit sitting at Ranchi in O.A./051/00888/2023 whereby and whereunder the learned Tribunal has tried to pass positive direction in favour of the writ petitioner for counting the period of his service since the date of his joining as ‘Gram Dak Sevak’ (GDS).

It has been submitted by Mr. Shadab Bin Haque, learned counsel for the petitioner that the whole grievance of the writ petitioner was to get the benefit of old pension scheme and that is the reason the prayer was made to count his service from the date when he was inducted in service initially as 1 Extra Department Mail Carrier (EDMC) in the Postal Department of India in Dhalbhumgarh Post Office. He has also pointed out the fact by referring to Annexure-1 which is the order of promotion to the post of Group-D category.

The argument has been advanced by referring to Annexure-1 that the vacancy although was of the year 2003-04 but purposely the DPC was convened in the year 2005 and in the meanwhile, new pension scheme has been given effect to with effect from 01.04.2004.

Although he has admitted that he has not made specific case on this ground before the Tribunal, now he intends to make an appropriate representation before the authority for consideration of the aforesaid ground. He, therefore, has sought for leave of this Court to withdraw this writ application by granting such liberty.

Mr. Prashant Vidyarthy, learned Sr. P.C for the respondents, has got no objection so far as withdrawal of the case is concerned.

This Court, considering the submission made on behalf of the writ petitioner, is granting such leave to withdraw this writ petition with a liberty to represent before the competent authority, i.e., the Respondent Nos.3 and 4 as per the submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner to agitate the aforesaid ground for his consideration as per law.

This Court is allowing the writ petitioner to withdraw the writ petition with the liberty aforesaid.