Central Administrative Tribunal

JYOTI KUMAR vs UNION OF INDIA on 5 October 2026

Cites 0, Cited by 0

Citations and Judicial Treatment

No citing decisions in the index yet

Cited by

0

Decisions in the index citing it

Cites

0

Decisions referred to

In this index

0

Of the decisions it cites

Overruled / Questioned

0

No negative treatment found

Loading the citing and cited decisions…

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PATNA Order Sheet Item no.: 13 O.A./51/2026 (RANCHI) [ FIXATION OF PAY ] With M.A./549/2026 RECALL OF ORDER Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 4 Order Dated: 05/10/2026 JYOTI KUMAR Vs UNION OF INDIA

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Shri Vinay Kumar For Respondent(s) Advocate : Shri Abhay prakash for R-3 & 4 Order of The Tribunal Learned counsel for both sides are present. MA No. 549/2026 has been filed by the counsel for Opposite Party with a prayer to recall the order 17.08.2026 by which it was directed to proceed ex-parte hearing against the Opposite Party No. 3 and 4 in the absence of written statement. Counsel for the applicant has received a copy of written statement but has not opposed. We have heard the counsel for Opposite Party and perused the MA. The reasons for not filing written statement in given time, have been explained in para 3 and 4 of MA. In view of the above, since the grounds mentioned in MA are sufficient to recall the order dated 17.08.2026 with regard to proceeding ex-parte against the Opposite Party, MA No. 549/2026 is allowed and the order dated 17.08.2026 is hereby recalled. The opportunity to file WS is granted since counsel for Opposite Party has submitted that he has already filed the written statement on 18.09.2026. It is seen that written statement is kept in File 'C' hence Registry is directed to place the written statement on record. Counsel for applicant has submitted that he may be given two weeks time to peruse the WS and to file rejoinder, if needed. Prayer is acceded to. Let the rejoinder be filed in two weeks positively. It is made clear that the rejoinder, if needed, shall be confined up to the extent of only new facts mentioned in the written statement, or any such facts which require specific denial.

List this case on 06.11.2026. KUMAR RAJESH CHANDRA Member (A) Justice Narendra Kumar Johari Member (J) Suryaroop Kabi ( ps )

You have used today's free searches. Sign in, for free, to keep searching without a limit.

Compass reads the judgments for you and finds the paragraphs for and against your question. Sign in to use it.

My Vault follows judgments for you and records every later decision that cites them. Sign in to keep one.

Sign in to download the court's PDF. The full text stays free to read here.

Sign in, for free, to download the court copy. Reading the full text here stays open to everyone.

Search and read Indian judgments without limits, save them to My Vault and find the relevant paragraphs with Compass.

Open the sign-in page instead