Central Administrative Tribunal
BAIJNATH SAHU vs DEFENCE on 28 October 2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Original Application No.200/01015/2026
Jabalpur, this Wednesday, the 28th day of October, 2026
HON’BLE SMT MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. Baijnath Sahu aged about 72 years, S/o retired Employee, R/o House no. 1185/8A, Jai Prakash Nagar, Jabalpur 482001
2. Sureth Ojha, aged 77 years, S/o. P.L. Ojha, Retired Fitter, Vehicle Factory Jabalpur, R/o. Aadhartal, Jalalpur, 482004k-
3. Ravindra Singh Verma, aged 72 years, So. Late Hori Lal Verma, Retired MCM, Vehicle Factory Jabalpur, R/o V.F.J. Road, Jabalpur, 462009
4. Mansur Ahmed, aged 71 years S/o Abdul Ahmed, Retired MCM, Vehicle Factory Jabalpur, R/o. Beoharbag, Jabalpur, 482001
5. Ram Saran Dubey, aged 74 years, S/o Raghunandan Dubey, Retried MT, Vehicle Factory Jabalpur, R/o. Pura Sarkanda, Bilaspur, Chattigarh, 495006
6. Krishna lal Shrivas, Aged about 74 Years, So Late Sitaram Shrivas, Retired MCM, Vehicle Factory Jabalpur, R/o Kanchghar Chungi Khowki
H. No 9/A Jabalpur, 482001
-Applicant
(By Advocate – Shri Anish Singh, proxy counsel for Shri Shubham Nanepag)
V e r s u s
VISHAL
KUSHWAH
1. Union of India, Through the Secretary, Ministry of Defence DHQ PO
NEW DELHI - 110011
2. The Director General EME Army HQ, New Deihi - 110011
3. The General Manager, Vehicle Factory Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh 482001
- Respondents
(By Advocate – Shri S P Singh)
Citations and Judicial Treatment
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…
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.
O R D E R
By Mallika Arya, AM: The matter pertains to grant of notional increment.
2. The counsel for the applicants has submitted that the representations of the applicants (Annexure A/2) have not been decided till date. The applicants will be satisfied if the respondents be directed to decide the representations of the applicants in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. v. M. Siddaraj (Civil Appeal No. 3933 of 2023), in a time bound manner.
3. The counsel for the respondents has no objection if this Original Application is disposed of in above terms.
4. Accordingly, this Original Application is disposed at the admission stage with direction to the respondents to decide the
VISHAL KUSHWAH
representations of the applicants (Annexure A/2 collectively) in light of the judgment passed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr. v. M. Siddaraj (Civil Appeal No. 3933 of 2023), by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order.
5. The applicants are directed to provide a copy of the order of this Tribunal along with the copy of Original Application to the competent authority.
6. All pending M.A.(s), if any, stands disposed.
(MallikaArya)
Administrative Member VK/-
VISHAL KUSHWAH