Sagar Meena vs DY. COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA on 30 October 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH 61/35, COPERNICUS MARG,NEW DELHI-110001 Order Sheet Item no.: 18 Diary No: 12940/2026 [ LDCE ] With MA Joining Together Court No.: 3 No of Adjournment: Order Dated: 30/10/2026 SAGAR MEENA Vs DY. COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Ms. Aanchal Anand For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. Sushil Raja Order of The Tribunal Objections of the Registry are overruled. Accordingly, the Registry is directed to assign a regular OA number to this matter.

2. Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the applicants were appointed as Assistant Audit Officers (AAO) on probation on 04.11.2022 and 10.11.2022, respectively. She submits that, in terms of the prevalent rules, the candidates are required to qualify the SAS examination in order to be confirmed in service.

3. Counsel submits that the respondents are required to conduct the said examination biannually so that the candidates have ample opportunity to participate and qualify in the same. However, since 2022, the applicants have participated in the said examination only five times, as the examinations have not been held regularly due to administrative or other reasons. She further submits that, in the intervening period, the rules of the examination have also changed, resulting in an increase in the number of papers which need to be cleared, thereby further increasing the hardship of the applicants.

4. It is submitted that the probation period of the applicants is due to end on 03.11.2026 and 09.11.2026, respectively, and since the applicants have not qualified in the said examination yet, they are likely to be terminated/discharged from service. They have, therefore, approached this Tribunal seeking interim protection, as set forth in Para 9 of the OA.

5. Heard.

6. Issue notice. Mr. Sushil Raja, appearing on advance service, accepts notice on behalf of the respondents. He seeks some time to file a reply.

7. Registry is directed to issue notice to Respondent No. 2.

8. In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, the balance of convenience lies in favour of the applicants and no prejudice shall be caused to the other side if interim protection is granted at this stage. Further, in order to ensure that the OA is not rendered infructuous, the respondents are directed not to take any coercive action, such as discharging/terminating the applicants from service, till the next date of hearing.

9. Respondents are granted two weeks' time to file reply.

10. Re-list on 18.11.2026.

Order 'Dasti'.

Dr. Sumeet Jerath Member (A) Harvinder Kaur Oberoi Member (J) Sourjya Sobhaniya ( steno 'c' )