Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 10 CAT CK 3572

Ratnesh Kumar Mall vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad · Decided on 7 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajiv Joshi, Member (J) · Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (A)
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 1155/2026

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 · 381 words

Delivered by: Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (J)

Heard Shri Santosh Kumar Kushwaha, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents.

2.

The instant Original Application, under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, has been filed by the applicant seeking following reliefs:

(i)

This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondent no. 2 i.e. Principal Chief Personnel Officer, N. E. Railway, Gorakhpur to first decide the objection and only thereafter issue result of written test and proceed further for formation of the final panel;

(ii)

Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case may be given in favour of the applicant.

(iii)

Award the costs of the original application in favour of the applicant.”

3.

At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the representation of the applicant dated 21.08.2026 (appended as Annexure A-7) followed by reminders/representations dated 24.08.2026 and 09.09.2026 (appended as Annexure A-8 and A-9 respectively) are pending before the respondents but the respondents have neither shown any consideration nor any orders have been passed. He further submits that the applicant would be satisfied, if a direction is issued upon the competent authority amongst the respondents to dispose of the pending representation of the applicant dated 24.08.2026 by passing a reasoned and speaking order.

4.

Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel representing the respondents states that he has no objection, if appropriate order is passed in this regard.

5.

The record reflects that the representation of the applicant dated 24.08.2026 (appended as Annexure A-8) has not been decided by the respondents till date. Therefore, the Competent Authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider the case of the applicant and take a decision on the pending representation of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order, under intimation to the applicant, in accordance with law, within a period of one month from the receipt of the certified copy of this order.

6.

It is made clear that this Court has not gone into the merits of the case.

7.

With the aforesaid observation and direction, the instant Original Application stands disposed of. No order as to costs.

8.

Pending M.A., if any, stands disposed of accordingly.