Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 5765

S.Jagadeesh Kumar vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad · Decided on 1 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manish Garg, Judicial Member · Shalini Misra, Administrative Member
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
OA/020/636/2026

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 · 361 words

(As per Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Judicial Member)

In the instant OA, the applicant is seeking the following relief:

“To declare the prolonged action of the respondents in not finalizing and implementing the Cadre Review/Restructuring of the Scientific Officers’ Cadre of the Indian Navy and in not taking a final decision on the proposed creation/operationalisation of the post of Chief Scientific Officer (CSO), thereby denying the applicant consideration for promotion despite he having completed the requisite qualifying service in May 2020, as arbitrary, illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequently direct the respondents to finalise and implement the pending Cadre Review/Restructuring, operationalise the post of Chief Scientific Officer with effect from May 2020, with all consequential notional, monetary, pensionary and other service benefits without permitting his superannuation on 31.08.2026 to prejudice or defeat his claim and pass such other order or orders as this Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2.

When the matter is taken up for admission hearing, the learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the applicant had made a representation dated 01.06.2026, to the respondents, ventilating his grievances, however, the same is pending for consideration. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the purpose of filing this OA will be fulfilled, if we direct the respondents to dispose of the applicant’s representation within a time-bound period.

3.

Mrs.K.Rajitha, learned senior panel standing counsel, appears on advance notice and seeks time for getting appropriate instructions in the matter.

4.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, the respondents are directed to consider and dispose of the pending representation of the applicant dated 01.06.2026, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, as per rules and law, within 30 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. It is also made clear that we have not gone into the merits of the case.

5.

With the above direction, the OA is disposed of at the admission stage. Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.