Back to feed Read the full judgment
IndiaCivil
Union Of India vs Ramdhani Prasad
- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- Sep 24, 2026
- Citation
- 2026 INSC 1047
- Judges
- Aravind Kumar, Vipul M. Pancholi
AI breakdown
- A railway officer was removed after overstaying leave by 72 days, claiming it was against the rules as a junior officer dismissed him.
- The Supreme Court overturned lower courts, stating his removal was valid under the rules by an authorized official.
- The decision clarified the chain-of-command in dismissals, affecting how similar cases are assessed.
Outcome
For the aforesaid reasons, the present appeal is allowed.
Taken from the judgment's conclusion. Check the full text for the exact order.
Parties
Applicant
Union Of India
Respondent
Ramdhani Prasad
Judgment text (excerpt)
Union Of India vs Ramdhani Prasad on 24 September, 2026
Author: Aravind Kumar
Bench: Aravind Kumar
2026 INSC 1047
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CIVIL APPEAL NO. OF 2026
(Arising out of SLP (C) No. 13645 of 2023)
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. … APPELLANTS
VERSUS
RAMDHANI PRASAD … RESPONDENT
JUDGMENT
VIPUL M. PANCHOLI, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal assails the judgment and order dated
12.01.2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad
in Second Appeal No. 676 of 1991, whereby the High Court
dismissed the second appeal preferred by the present appellants
and affirmed the judgment and order dated 07.12.1990 passed in
Civil Appeal No. 30 of 1989 by the learned Additional Civil Judge,
Signature Not Verified
Digitally signed by
RAHUL KUMAR
Date: 2026.09.24
Gorakhpur (for brevity, “the First Appellate Court”). The High
16:59:19 IST
Reason:
Court held that the respondent had been appointed as a ‘Rakshak’
1
in the Railway Protection Special Force (for brevity, “the RPSF”) by
the Commandant/Chief Security Officer and therefore, his
removal by the subordinate authority i.e. the Adjutant/Assistant
Commandant, was in violation of Article 311(1) of the Constitution
of India (for brevity, “the Constitution”).
2.1. The First Appellate Court allowed the appeal preferred by
the present respondent and reversed the judgment and
order dated 03.12.1988 passed in Case No. 2662 of 1986
by the learned Additional Munsif Magistrate, Gorakhpur
(for brevity, “the Trial Court”). The First Appellate Court
held that the re…

Source: Indian Kanoon (indiankanoon.org). Indian court judgments are public records; the summary and translations are AI-generated.