Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 10 CAT CK 3418

Dr. Pramod Kumar Malik vs State Council Of Educational Research And Training & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 7 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
R. N. Singh, Member (J) · Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
O. A. No. 3925/2026

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

12 paragraphs · 419 words

Hon’ble Mr. R. N. Singh, Member (J):

By filing the present O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has sought the following reliefs:-

“(i)

Declare that the impugned action on the part of the respondents in not reinstating/re-engaging the Applicant to the post of Assistant Professor on a contractual basis is illegal, unjustified, and discriminatory, and accordingly direct the respondents to reinstate/re-engage the Applicant to the post of Assistant Professor on a contractual basis with all consequential benefits (monetary as well as non-monetary), including full back wages, seniority, etc;

(ii)

allow the present Original Application with costs in favour of the applicant; and

(iii)

issue any other appropriate Order or direction as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice and in the favour of the Applicants;”

2.

It is an admitted case of the applicant that despite a legal notice dated 09.07.2026 [Annexure A-1 (Colly)] issued to the respondents on behalf of the applicant, the respondents have neither redressed the grievance of the applicant raised in the present O.A. nor they have responded to the said legal notice. The present application is also listed under the head of ‘Office-Objection’ on the ground that the same is pre-mature.

3.

In light of the aforesaid, learned proxy counsel appearing for the applicant, at this stage, submits that the applicant shall be satisfied if the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority amongst the respondents to consider the applicant’s legal notice dated 09.07.2026 [Annexure A-1 (Colly)] and furnish an appropriate reply to the applicant thereto, in accordance with law, in a time bound manner. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection to the aforesaid request.

4.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, without going into the merits of the case and with the consent of learned counsels for the parties, the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the Competent Authority amongst the respondents to consider the claim of the applicant and respond to the legal notice dated 09.07.2026 [Annexure A-1 (Colly)] by passing a speaking and reasoned order as expeditiously as possible and preferably within 6 weeks from receipt of certified copy of this Order.

5.

In view of the aforesaid, the present O.A. stands disposed of.

6.

Associated M.A., if any, also stands disposed of accordingly.

7.

However, there shall be no order as to costs.

8.

Registry is directed to assign an appropriate number to the present matter.