SARAN SINGH CHAUHAN vs DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING on 28 October 2026

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH 61/35, COPERNICUS MARG,NEW DELHI-110001 Order Sheet Item no.: 19 O.A./444/2023 (NAINITAL) [ PROMOTION ] Court No.: 999 No of Adjournment: 24 Order Dated: 28/10/2026 SARAN SINGH CHAUHAN Vs DEPARTMENT OF PERSONNEL AND TRAINING

For Applicant(s) Advocate : Proxy counsel (name not given) for Mr. M.C. Pant.

For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. T.C. Aggarwal. Order of The Tribunal The learned counsel for the applicant contended that the present OA has been filed challenging column 2 of Schedule Appendix 2 of Navy Technical Supervisor (Top Most) Group "B" non-gazetted (Printing Staff )Post-Recruitment Rules 2002 to the extent it prescribes the feeder cadre of machine man grade-1 level 6 in 7th CPC level -5 cameramen is a feeder cadre to the post of Technical Supervisor(Top Most). The learned counsel for the applicant contended that column 2 of Schedule Appendix 2 of Navy Technical Supervisor (Top Most) Group "B" non-gazetted (Printing Staff )Post-Recruitment Rules 2002 is contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution of India, as it prescribes an unequal feeder cadre to the promotional post of Technical Supervisor (Top Most), and it becomes an empty formality to the applicants who are in level-6 as level-5 candidates are being considered along with the level-6.

The learned counsel for the respondents submits that the applicants did not have the requisite residency period of 8 years and hence could not be considered. The learned counsel for the applicant argued at substantial length and seeks some time to prepare the matter and also to file the written submissions. As prayed, re-notify on 30.10.2026. Rajinder Kashyap Member (A) Ajay Pratap Singh Member (J) Abhay Chaudhary ( steno 'c' )