Union Of India & Ors. vs Yashvant

By Mallika Arya.-

Present Misc. Application has been filed by the applicants (hereinafter referred to as ‘respondents’) to reopen the case of Shri Yashvant (applicant in OA No. 929/2014) which has been disposed of vide order dated 28.11.2017. The learned counsel for the respondents has stated that after the aforesaid order has been affirmed by the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh vide judgment dated 03.04.2018 in Writ Petition No. 1349/2018 , the applicant was appointed. However, the said case has resulted as a precedent and the orders are being passed by this Tribunal each individual case. The learned counsel for the respondents has also submitted that the order dated 28.11.2017 itself is contrary to the terms of the Railway Board policy wherein the grandson was not included. The learned counsel has further submitted that after the order dated 28.11.2017, the department is facing practical difficulties in implementing the orders passed by this Tribunal in subsequent OAs as the policy of the Railway Board is no more in existence. The learned counsel for the respondents has also submitted that the order in the case of Yashvant was purely on sympathetic ground. Therefore, the said judgment cannot be treated as a precedent. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the respondents has cited the judgment dated 12.03.2026 passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh in Writ Petition No. 23127/2025 – UOI & Ors Vs. Bhaiya Prashant Singh.

On the other hand, the learned counsel for the respondent (hereinafter referred to as applicant) has opposed the MA on the ground that once the order of the Tribunal dated 28.11.2017 has merged into the judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh after it was upheld by the Hon’ble High Court and has attained finality. Therefore, the case of the applicant in OA No. 929/2014 (Yashvant) cannot be reopened. In support of his contentions, the learned counsel for the applicant has cited the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in SLP (C) No. 7130/2024- State of Uttar Pradesh Vs. Virendra Bahadur Katheria- 2024 INSC 524.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the rival submissions.

It is not disputed that the OA No. 929/2014 filed by Yashvant was allowed by this Tribunal vide order dated 28.11.2017. The said order was challenged by the respondents / railways in W.P. No. 1349/2018 which got dismissed vide judgment dated 03.04.2018 passed by Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh. Thus, the order of the Tribunal has merged into the order of the Hon’ble High Court. However, the respondents had an option to challenge the order of the High Court of Chhattisgarh which they have not done.

Now, after lapse of more than eight years of the order of the Hon’ble High Court, the respondents have filed the present MA to reopen the case of the applicant. It is very astonishing as to how the respondents have chosen to seek reopening of the case before this Tribunal when the order of the Tribunal has merged into the judgment of Hon’ble High Court. The grounds taken by the respondents to file the present MA do not appear to be justified and do not give any cause of action on the doctrine of merger. Once the High Court affirms the Tribunal's decision, the original order of the Tribunal merges into the High Court’s judgment. The Tribunal loses jurisdiction to alter or reopen that specific application. Once the order has attained finality, it generally cannot be reopened as it is a core facet of a sound judicial system to prevent chaos and unnecessary litigation.

Further, the Hon’ble Supreme Court has repeatedly emphasized that a litigation that has reached its logical conclusion cannot be routinely resurrected, as doing so would destabilize the administration of justice. Thus, we are of the opinion, that the present Misc. Application filed by the respondents is highly misconceived and this action on the part of the respondents cannot be appreciated at all. Accordingly, we dismiss the MA No. 367/2026 with a cost of Rs. 5,000/- to be deposited with the State Legal Cell, High Court of Chhattisgarh.