Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 4687

Monika vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 10 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member(A) · Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member(J)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
OA No. 3453/2026

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

7 paragraphs · 359 words

Hon’ble Mrs. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member(J)

The applicant, who is serving as Income Tax Inspector (ITI) and is presently posted in Kerala Region, had sought an inter-commissionerate transfer (ICT) from Kerala to Delhi Region.

2.

Before the respondents could consider or pass any order on the request for ICT, the transfer regime in the respondents’ department was changed from ICT to transfer on loan basis.

3.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would like to rely upon the orders passed by this Tribunal in OA No. 124/2021 (Rakesh Bahadur & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.) dated 05.03.2024 by the Mumbai Bench, followed by the order of the Lucknow Bench in OA No. 332/181/2025 (Chandan Kr. Srivastava Vs. Union of India & Ors.) and the order of the Chennai Bench dated 10.01.2024.

3.

He submits that the orders passed by various Benches follow the well-settled principle that once a claim under the old policy has been made, the same cannot be rejected merely upon promulgation of a new policy, particularly in view of the various circulars and office orders issued by the department itself. He submits that the various decisions referred to above have already been implemented by the respondents. As such, there is no reason for the respondents to deny consideration of the applicant's request in terms of the said decisions. He submits that the applicant had approached the respondents with an application for ICT first on 20.09.2019, followed by multiple representations, the latest being dated 10.06.2026.

4.

In view of the above, since the respondents have already implemented the directions issued by the Tribunal in the aforementioned OAs, let the respondents take a call on the representation of the applicant in the light of the aforesaid orders, coupled with the fact that the same have already been implemented by the respondents in similar cases. The representation shall be decided by a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.

5.

The OA is disposed of in the aforesaid terms at the admission stage itself. No order as to costs.