Central Administrative Tribunal
James Mathai vs EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANISATION (EPFO) on 4 November 2026
::1 :: OA No. 244/2026
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
AHMEDABAD BENCH
Original Application No. 244/2026
With MA No. 307/2026
Dated this the 04th day of November, 2026
CORAM:
Hon’ble Shri Jayesh V Bhairavia, Member (J)
Hon’ble Sanjiv Kumar, Member (A)
1.
Shri James Mathai
Son of Late Shri Mathai Samuel
Aged 54 years, Serving as Senior SSA
In the office of RO, Rajkot of the respondents, Residing at ‘Aditya’ Kerala Park, Nr. T.N. Rao College, Opp. Family Mart, University Road, Rajkot – 360 007.
… Applicant
(By Advocate Mr. M S Trivedi)
V/s.
1.
Union of India Through
The Central Provident Fund Commissioner, O/o CPFC, Employees Provident Fund Head Office, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Bhikhaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110066.
2.
The Additional Central Provident Fund Commissioner (HQ)
HR Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. of India, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Bhikhaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110066.
3.
The Deputy Director (Vigilance),
O/o. Deputy Director (Vigilance),
ZVD West Zone, Bandra,
Mumbai – 400 050.
4.
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner O/o. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. of India, Bhavishyanidhi Bhavan, Nr. RBI, Income Tax Circle, P ANUKUMA
::2 :: OA No. 244/2026
Ashram Road, Ahmedabad – 380 014.
5.
The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner O/o. The Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Employees Provident Fund Organization, Ministry of Labour & Employment, Govt. Of India, Panchayat Nagar Chowk, University Road, Rajkot – 360 005.
… Respondents
(By Advocate Ms. Nisha Parikh)
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.
ORDER
Per: Hon’ble Shri Jayesh V Bhairavia, Member (J)
1. Mr. M S Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant submits that disciplinary proceedings have been initiated against the applicant vide charge memorandum dated 08.01.2026 under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
2. In respect to the charges leveled against the applicant, the disciplinary authority cited two witnesses namely one Shri Jayant Kumar Pandey, the then RPFC-1, RO Rajkot and Shri Supratik Dash, the then RPFC- II, RO, Rajkot.
3. At the same time, the respondents have initiated disciplinary proceedings against the very said witnesses vide charge memorandum dated 13.01.2026 under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, for the same set of facts and transactions for which the charge sheet is issued to the applicant.
4. Mr. M S Trivedi, learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the said charge memorandum dated 13.01.2026 issued to Shri Jayant Kumar Pandey, the then RPFC-1, RO Rajkot and Shri Supratik Dash, the then RPFC-II, RO, Rajkot, the applicant herein has been cited as departmental witness by the respondents. Therefore, it has been submitted that since, the departmental inquiry/proceedings initiated against the applicant as well against Shri Jayant Kumar Pandey and P ANUKUMA
::3 :: OA No. 244/2026
Shri Supratik Dash arising from the common transactions/issues, the applicant herein be allowed to submit his comprehensive representation before the disciplinary authority in view of the provision of Rule 18 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 with a view to hold the inquiry/common proceedings together.
5. At this stage, without expressing opinion on the merit of the claim of the applicant, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this OA by granting liberty to the applicant to submit his representation before the disciplinary authority as requested hereinabove for conducting inquiry in view of the provisions of Rule 18 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
6. Applicant herein is directed to submit his representation within two weeks and respondents are directed to examine the Rules, material on record as well as the grounds stated by the applicant in his representation expeditiously not later than 60 days and intimate the decision to the applicant.
7. In the meantime, respondents are also directed not to proceed with the departmental inquiry in respect to the charge memorandum dated 08.01.2026.
8. In view of the above, OA stands disposed of.
9. MA pending if any, also stands disposed of.
Sanjiv Kumar
Jayesh V Bhairavia
Member (A)
Member(J)
Anu P ANUKUMA