Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 6777

Jagdish Prasad vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow · Decided on 29 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Anil Kumar Ojha, Member (J) · Pankaj Kumar, Member (A)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 332/00579/2026

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 · 349 words

PER HON’BLE JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J)

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.

2.

Through this OA, applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:-

“1- To revise the pay of the applicant while granting him promotion as ordered to be given with effect from 01.09.2002 as HS-II and with effect from 01.01.2006 as HS-I and benefits of MACP as proposed by the respondents.

2- To grant update revision f pay and other benefits and release arrears thereof alongwith interest @ 12% pa from the date of due till the actual date of payment.

3- Any other relief, which this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper under the circumstance of the case, may also be passed.

4- Cost of the present case.”

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the instant O.A. may be disposed of as applicant is only seeking decision on the representation preferred by him and ends of justice would be served if a direction is given by this Tribunal to the respondents / competent authority to consider and dispose of the pending representation of the applicant dated 29.11.2025 attached as Annexure No. A-21 (page- 49) to this OA by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period of time.

4.

Learned counsel for the respondents orally opposed, however, submitted that in case the applicant’s representation is directed to be decided in the manner suggested then for the same at least two months’ time may be allowed.

5.

In view of the above submissions, respondents / competent authority are directed to consider and decide the representation of the applicant dated 29.11.2025 attached as Annexure No. A-21 (page- 49) to this OA by passing a reasoned and speaking order as per law within a period of two months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order under intimation to the applicant forthwith.

6.

Merits of the case has not been touched upon by this Tribunal.

7.

The OA is disposed of accordingly. There is no order as to costs.