Central Administrative Tribunal
P VENUGOPAL vs M/o Personnel,public Grievances And Pensions on 3 November 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 ERNAKULAM Order Sheet Item no.: 5 M.A./181/2020 (ERNAKULAM) [ DIRECTION ] In O.A./349/2014 M.A./781/2026 Court No.: 1 No of Adjournment: 26 Order Dated: 03/11/2026 P VENUGOPAL Vs M/O PERSONNEL,PUBLIC GRIEVANCES AND PENSIONS For Applicant(s) Advocate : Mr. P.V. Mohanan For Respondent(s) Advocate : Mr. M.M. Salim, Senior GP Notes of The Registry Order of The Tribunal
The respondents were directed to file a statement regarding the amount due and drawn. The statement has not been filed. However, learned Senior GP has placed before us a communication dated 02.11.2026 received from the Office of the Chief Secretary to Government addressed to the Advocate General of Keralam informing that the Accountant General has invited the attention of the Government to clause 3(i) G.O (P) No. 47/26/FIN, cases of officers appointed during 6th CPC period from 01.01.2006 to 31.12.2015 that new pay fixation method applies to the officers appointed on or after 01.01.2016. It further states that appointment prior to 01.01.2016 continue to be governed by the respective All India Service Pay Rules. It is also stated that clause 3(ii) clarifies that "However already settled cases will not be re-opened under any circumstances." In this regard, the learned Accountant General has sought the attention of the Government to the above provisions and sought clarification regarding interpretation and the applicability of the guidelines dated 09.03.2026 from the Government. We, prima facie feel that the attempt of the learned Accountant General calling upon the Government to interpret the order of the Tribunal itself is per se contempt. He is not expected to create hindrance in the implementation of the order granted. Therefore, respondents are directed to implement the order and file a statement as directed; failing which, personal appearance of the 3rd respondent will be ordered. List on 03.12.2026. V RAMA MATHEW MEMBER (A) JUSTICE SUNIL THOMAS MEMBER (J) A X ( steno 'c' )
Case No M.A./181/2020 Ernakulam Bench List In: Main causelist Item No. 5 Generated by Sherin A.X CAT Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench on 03/11/2026
2026.11.04 15:13:41 +05'30' A X Sherin