Central Administrative Tribunal
ARVIND KUMAR vs TELECOMMUNICATION on 30 October 2026
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.
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH 61/35, COPERNICUS MARG,NEW DELHI-110001 Order Sheet Item no.: 26 M.A./5096/2026 (DELHI) [ DELETION OF RESPONDANT ] In O.A./4626/2025 PROMOTION Court No.: 3 No of Adjournment: 1 Order Dated: 30/10/2026 ARVIND KUMAR Vs TELECOMMUNICATION
For Applicant(s) Advocate : Mr. Shashwat Sharma For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. Amardeep Singh (proxy), Mr. Anupam Raj for R1, For Respondent No. 2 to 5 Order of The Tribunal MA No. 5096/2026 This MA has been filed by Respondent No. 1 in the OA seeking deletion from the Array of Parties.
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 1 in the OA submits that the applicant is an employee of MTNL and the relief claimed in the OA pertains to promotion and other related benefits and the same has to be dealt with by MTNL. Hence, Respondent No. 1 has no role to play in the associated OA.
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant in the OA, opposes this argument of the respondents. He draws attention to the relief claimed in the OA i.e. re-fixation of pay of the applicant along with consequential benefits. He submits that the applicant is due to retire in January 2027 and the re-fixation of pay would affect his pension. Further, he submits that his pension has to be released by the Dept. of Telecom and therefore Respondent No. 1 is not only necessary but also the appropriate party in the matter.
4. We are in agreement with the submissions of learned counsel for the applicant. Moreso, for the reason that Respondent No. 1 should be aware of the orders passed in this litigation from time to time so as to avoid multiple or layered litigation at a later stage.
5. In view of what has been discussed hereinabove, this MA is dismissed.
6. Respondent No. 1 to file reply to the OA within three weeks' time. Applicant shall be at liberty to file rejoinder within a period of two weeks thereafter.
7. Re-list the OA on 18.01.2027.
Dr. Sumeet Jerath Member (A) Harvinder Kaur Oberoi Member (J)
Sourjya Sobhaniya ( steno 'c' )