Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 09 CAT CK 3003

Sh. Santu Ram vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi · Decided on 14 September 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manish Garg, Member (J) · Anand S Khati, Member (A)
CASE NUMBER
O.A. No. 3102/2026

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

11 paragraphs · 378 words

By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)

In the present Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicants seek the following reliefs:

“(i)

to declare the impugned action of the respondents of not releasing the retirement benefits viz. pension, gratuity (DCRG), commutation, leave encashment etc. to the applicant wef 01.06.2026 to till date as illegal, arbitrary and unjustified.

(ii)

To direct the respondents to pay interest @ 12% on the delayed payment of retirement benefits viz. pension, gratuity, leave encashment, commutation etc. wef 01.06.2026 to till date.

(iii)

To allow the OA with cost.

(iv)

To pass such other and further orders which their lordships of this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in the existing facts and circumstances of the case.”

2.

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the representation dated 04.07.2026 is still pending consideration before the respondents. He submits that the applicants would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider and dispose of the aforesaid representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated time.

3.

Issue notice. Mr. Jalaj Aggarwal and Mr. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel, appear and accept notice on behalf of the respondents. Mr. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel, appears on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 to 4 and seeks time on the ground that he has not been served with a copy of the Original Application. Let learned counsel for the applicants supply a copy of the Original Application to Mr. Pradeep Kumar, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 2 to 4.

4.

In view of the above, and without entering into the merits of the case, the present O.A. is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider and decide the aforesaid representation by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of thirty (30) days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. A copy of the speaking order so passed shall be furnished to the applicants.

5.

The O.A. is disposed of in the aforesaid terms, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, at the admission stage itself.

6.

Pending M.A.(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.