Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 4647

Dr. Manoj Kumar Prasad vs Principal Secretary, Health and Family Welfare & Anr.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 14 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
B. Anand, Member (A) · Ajay Pratap Singh, Member (J)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
O.A. No. 2004/2026

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

5 paragraphs · 295 words

Hon’ble Shri B. Anand, Member (A)

1.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 10.02.2026 bearing the subject ‘Information regarding delay/non-payment of CEA for 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13’, which is an internal communication amongst the respondents and wherein it is stated that the claim could not be processed at that time and it has been certified that no children education allowance was paid by the office for the above said period. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant has given various representations airing his grievances, including the latest on dated 27.02.2026, which are still pending consideration. Learned counsel submits that the applicant would be satisfied if a direction were to be given by the Tribunal to the respondents to consider and dispose of all the pending representations of the applicant by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a limited time frame.

2.

Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. H.A. Khan, learned counsel, who appears on advance service, accepts notice.

3.

In view of the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant and keeping in view no objection from the learned counsel for the respondents, the O.A. is disposed of at the admission stage itself and without going into the merits, with a direction to the applicant to prefer a fresh representation to the respondents which shall be carefully considered by the competent authority amongst the respondents and disposed of by way of reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from the date of receipt of the said representation. However, it is made clear that the issue of limitation shall remain open.

4.

The O.A. stands disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs.