Central Administrative Tribunal
Gadila Triloknath vs CENTRAL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT on 9 October 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
HYDERABAD BENCH : HYDERABAD
OA/021/778/2026
HYDERABAD, this the 9th day of October, 2026
HON’BLE Mr. MANISH GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON’BLE Mr.VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
BETWEEN:
Gadila Triloknath, S/o Sri. G. Venkataiah, Aged about 56 years, Occupation: Beldar, Office of the Executive Engineer, Hyderabad Central Division-III
(HCD-III), Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Nirman Bhawan, Koti, Hyderabad - 500001. Resident of H.No. 18-6-134, Gowlipura, Hyderabad - 500253.
... Applicant
(By Advocate: Mr.K.Phani raju )
AND
1. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Vidyut Bhawan, Shankar Market, Connaught, Place, New Delhi 110011.
2. The Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs, Vidyut Bhawan, Shankar Market, New Delhi-110011.
3. The Director General of Works,
Central Public Works Department (CPWD), Vidyut Bhawan, Shankar Market, Connaught Place, New Delhi - 110011.
4. The Special Director General, Southern Region, CPWD, 'C' Wing, 1st Floor, Rajaji Bhavan, Besant Nagar, Chennai - 600090.
5. The Additional Director General, CPWD, Nirman Bhawan, Koti, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad - 500001.
6. The Executive Engineer, Hyderabad Central Division-III
(HCD-III), CPWD, Nirman Bhawan,
Koti, Sultan Bazar, Hyderabad - 500001.
… Respondents
(By Advocate: Mrs.M.Swarna, Sr.PC for CG)
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET="No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad", Phone=
e9139f685446ba88b1951014524a4686cad5619e209d584134900f3759545854, SERIALNUMBER=2185a73b6158e7c1d87ad8c68c3773e034c1e5d18191c31d7a3f9699631571dc, E=dsatyanarayana74@gmail.com, CN=SATYANARAYANA DUMPALA
Location:
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
6
Decisions referred to
In this index
4
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORAL ORDER
(As per Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Judicial Member)
In the instant OA, the applicant is seeking the following relief: “(a) To declare the prolonged inaction, omission, and failure of the Respondents to regularize the services of the Applicant in the substantive category of Beldar, as highly arbitrary, discriminatory, illegal, and contrary to Articles 14, 16, and 21 of the Constitution of India; and
b) Direct the Respondents to regularize the services of the Applicant as a regular Beldar Group 'D' with retrospective effect on par with his juniors against the existing 34 vacant sanctioned posts under the 5th Respondent with all consequential benefits such as seniority benefits, back-wages and differential financial emoluments arising therefrom, and pass any such further order(s) as deemed fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.”
2. The brief facts of the case, according to the Applicant, are that he was initially appointed on casual basis with effect from 22.11.2003, as a Beldar and subsequently, his services were utilizing as "Beldar" continuously without any remark till date. He had completed more than 23 years of service in the department. Though most of his Juniors have been regularized earlier, his name was not even included in the seniority list for long time. Now, there are 34 vacancies of "Beldar" available with 5th respondent and are taking steps to fill up the same.
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET="No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad", Phone= e9139f685446ba88b1951014524a4686cad5619e209d584134900f3759545854, SERIALNUMBER=2185a73b6158e7c1d87ad8c68c3773e034c1e5d18191c31d7a3f9699631571dc, E=dsatyanarayana74@gmail.com, CN=SATYANARAYANA DUMPALA
Location:
3. The applicant has, therefore, contended that the action of the respondents in maintaining him on a casual/contractual layout for 23 long years without conferring permanent regular status constitutes a structural unfair labour practice and violates the foundational equity enshrined under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and prayed for a direction from this Tribunal to regularize his services as a regular Beldar Group ‘D’ with retrospective effect with his juniors against 34 vacant sanctioned posts under the 5th respondent with all consequential benefits. In support of his contention, he has relied on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court viz., State of Karnataka v. Umadevi (2006 (4) SCC 1), State of Karnataka v. M.L.Kesari (2010 (9) SCC 247), Narendra Kumar Tiwari v. State of Jharkhand (2018 (8 SCC) 238), Vinod Kumar v. Union of India (2024 INSC 251), Jaggo v. Union of India & Others (2024 INSC 394), AmritLal Berry v. Collector of Central Excise (1975 (4) SCC 714), and State of Karnataka v. C.Lalitha (2006 (2) SCC 747).
4. On advance copy Mrs.M.Swarna, learned Senior Panel Counsel, appeared on behalf of the Respondents.
5. During the course of admission hearing, when questioned as to whether the applicant has made a representation to the respondent-authorities ventilating his grievances, the learned counsel for the Applicant submitted that the applicant has not made any representation.
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET="No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad", Phone= e9139f685446ba88b1951014524a4686cad5619e209d584134900f3759545854, SERIALNUMBER=2185a73b6158e7c1d87ad8c68c3773e034c1e5d18191c31d7a3f9699631571dc, E=dsatyanarayana74@gmail.com, CN=SATYANARAYANA DUMPALA
Location:
6. 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 applicant to submit a detailed representation along with cases laws in support of his case within seven (07) days to the respondents and to dispose of the applicant’s representation within a time-bound period by the respondents.
7. The OA is accordingly disposed of at the admission stage, with a direction to the applicant to submit a detailed representation along with cases laws, relied upon by him, in support of his case within seven (07) days to the respondent-authorities and after receipt of the said representation, the respondents shall pass 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. Pending MAs, if any, also stand disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.
(VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI)
(MANISH GARG) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
JUDICIAL MEMBER
/DSN/
DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET="No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad", Phone= e9139f685446ba88b1951014524a4686cad5619e209d584134900f3759545854, SERIALNUMBER=2185a73b6158e7c1d87ad8c68c3773e034c1e5d18191c31d7a3f9699631571dc, E=dsatyanarayana74@gmail.com, CN=SATYANARAYANA DUMPALA
Location: