Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 10 CAT CK 1060

Union Of India & Ors. vs Sandeep Kumar

Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 7 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Manish Garg, Member (J) · Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
M.A. No. 5001/2026 in DY. No. 6388/2026 (RA) in O.A. No. 70/2025

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

9 paragraphs · 281 words

Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :

M.A. No. 5001/2026

For the reasons mentioned in the Miscellaneous Application, we allow the same and condone the delay of 102 days in filing the accompanying Review Application filed vide Dy. No. 6388/2026.

Review Application (Dy. No. 6388/2026)

The present Review Application has been filed seeking review of the common order dated 08.01.2026, insofar as it relates to O.A. No. 70/2025 filed by the applicant, Shri Sandeep Kumar, whereby the said Original Application was allowed and the impugned order cancelling his candidature was quashed and set aside.

2.

By way of the present Review Application, the respondents seek reconsideration of the findings recorded by this Tribunal, particularly with regard to the statistical/algorithmic analysis conducted by the Indian Statistical Institute and the alleged matching of the applicant’s answer pattern with other candidates, contending that the material establishing use of unfair means was not properly appreciated.

3.

We have considered the grounds urged in the Review Application. The same essentially seek re-appreciation of the material and reconsideration of the findings already recorded in the order dated 08.01.2026. The Tribunal had duly considered the material placed before it and recorded findings regarding the non-disclosure of specific material relied upon against the applicant and the failure of the impugned order to adequately deal with his response.

4.

No error apparent on the face of the record has been pointed out warranting exercise of review jurisdiction. The attempt to seek a fresh appreciation of the evidence and to elaborate upon the statistical material cannot be permitted in review proceedings.

5.

Accordingly, the present Review Application is dismissed in circulation. Pending M.A.(s), if any, shall stand disposed of. No costs.