Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 10 CAT CK 3605

A. Yesupadam vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai · Decided on 5 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Veena Kothavale, Member (J) · M. L. Srivastava, Member (A)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
OA 310/01160/2026

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

11 paragraphs · 312 words

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Veena Kothavale, Member(J))

Heard the learned counsel for the applicant.

2.

In the present OA, the applicant has sought the following relief:

“i)

To direct the respondents to grant upgradation of pay scale was granted to the Postman cadre, for Postman in the pay scale of Rs. 3200-85-4900 from 01.01.1996, Postman (TBOP) in pay scale of Rs. 4000-100-6000 and Postman (BCR) pay scale of Rs.4500-125- 7000; consequent to,

ii) direct the respondents to extend the benefit of revision of pension/family pension w.e.f. 01.01.1996, 01.01.2006 and 01.01.2016 in respect of pensioners who were drawing compulsory retirement as per OM dated 14.06.2022; further to

iii) direct the respondents to revise and refix his pay including pension and pay the arrears to the applicant; and

iv) To pass such further or other orders as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

3.

The learned counsel for the applicant submits that pursuant to the OM dated 14.06.2022, the applicant had submitted representation dated 18.05.2026 seeking to refix his pay and allowances. However, the respondents have not passed any order thereon. Therefore, applicant is seeking direction to the respondents to consider and dispose of his representation dated 18.05.2026 within a timeframe to be stipulated by this Tribunal.

4.

Mr. Su. Srinivasan, SCGSC, who has appeared for respondents, has no objection for issuing the direction as above.

5.

In view of the limited relief sought as above, OA is disposed of without entering into the merits of the case, with a direction to the competent authority among the respondents to consider and dispose of the representation dated 18.05.2026 given by the applicant by passing a reasoned speaking order in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

6.

The OA is disposed of as above.