WP/3829/2026 of I.SRINIVASA NAIK Vs THE SECRETARY on 1 September 2026

ORDER

(Order of the Court was made by S.M.Subramaniam, J.) The present writ petition has been instituted challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chennai Bench, dated 18.11.2025 passed in C.P.No.57 of 2025 in O.A.No.708 of 2019.

2. The petitioner appearing in person would mainly contend that the Tribunal passed an order directing the Authorities to consider his case and other similarly placed persons for regularisation and pass necessary orders within a period of four months. However, the Tribunal

W.P.NO.3829 OF 2026

further proceeded by stating that in the event of applicant’s services are regularised from a particular date and their juniors are promoted to the next cadre, the case of those applicants for promotion with effect from the dates on which their juniors were promoted also to be considered subsequently.

3. Relying on the above findings, the petitioner-in-person would submit that his case ought to have been considered by the Department. However, they have passed an order vide Proceedings dated 07.04.2025 rejecting the claim of the petitioner. Thus, he filed a Contempt Petition and in view of the compliance report filed by the respondents, the Contempt Petition was closed by the Tribunal, which resulted in filing of the present writ petition.

4. Perusal of the order passed in the Original Application would reveal that directions were issued to the Authorities to consider the case of the writ petitioner. The first limb of the relief granted by the order dated 07.11.2024 was to consider the case of the writ petitioner and other similarly placed persons for regularisation. The second limb reiterated that, in the event their services were regularised, they were to

W.P.NO.3829 OF 2026

be considered for grant of retrospective promotion. Thus, in both the directions, the Tribunal made it clear that the case of the writ petitioner is only to be “considered”. Pertinently, the issues raised between the parties were not adjudicated on merits. In the absence of any adjudication on merits, a mere direction to consider the representation would not provide any right to seek a positive order from the Authorities.

5. In the present case, the Authorities considered the case in compliance with the directions of the Tribunal and passed an order vide Proceedings dated 07.04.2025. The Tribunal based on the compliance report, closed the contempt petition, which in the opinion of this Court, cannot be construed as an error. Thus, liberty is granted to the writ petitioner to challenge the order dated 07.04.2025, in the manner known to law. With this liberty, the writ petition stands dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. [S.M.S., J.] [K.G.R., J.]

01.09.2026 Index : Yes Speaking Order : Yes Neutral Citation : Yes / No TK

W.P.NO.3829 OF 2026

To

1. The Secretary Ministry of Housing and Urban Affairs Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi – 110 011.

2. The Secretary (Personnel) Department of Personnel and Training North Block, New Delhi – 110 001.

3. The Secretary Union Public Service Commission Dholpur House, Shahjahan Road, New Delhi – 110 069.

4. The Director General Central Public Works Department Nirman Bhawan, Maulana Azad Road, New Delhi – 110 011.

W.P.NO.3829 OF 2026

S.M.SUBRAMANIAM, J. AND KRISHNASWAMY GOVINDARAJAN, J. TK W.P.NO.3829 OF 2026 01.09.2026