Central Administrative Tribunal
shivendra singh vs REVENUE on 5 November 2026
Open Court
Central Administrative Tribunal
Allahabad Bench
Allahabad
This the 05th day of November, 2026
Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (J)
Hon’ble Ms. Manju Pandey, Member (A)
Original Application No. 1278 of 2026
Shivendra Singh, a/a 23 years, S/o Hardev Singh Jadaun, R/o 804, Satteshwar, P.O.
Auraiya,
District
Auraiya-20612
(U.P.).
Jadaun_shiva274@gmail.com.
…….. APPLICANT
By Advocate: Shri Ashok Kumar Singh
Versus
1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, New Delhi-110001.
2. Deputy Director, Staff Selection Commission (Central Region), 34-A, Kendriya Sadan, Mahatma Gandhi Marg, Civil Lines, Prayagraj-211001.
3. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax (HQ), Personnel, Mumbai O/o Principal Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, 3rd Floor, Aayakar Bhawan, Maharshi Karve Road, Mumbai-400020.
4. Under Secretary, Staff Selection Commission (HQ), Block No.12, C-2-Section, C.G.O. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi - 110003
.………RESPONDENTS
By Advocate: Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan
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
(Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (J) Shri Ashok Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents, are present and heard.
ASHISH KUMAR
2. The instant original application has been filed seeking following relief: “i) Issue an order or direction commanding the competent authority among the respondents to issue appointment letter to applicant for the post of Multi Tasking (Non-Technical) Staff in the office of respondent No.3.
ii) Issue an order or direction commanding the Respondents which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the present facts and circumstances of this case.
iii) Award the cost of Original Application.”
3. The brief facts of the case as narrated in the OA are that the applicant was selected for the post of Multi Tasking (Non-Technical) Staff in the Income Tax Department, Mumbai Region, pursuant to the SSC Examination, 2024, and was issued an offer of appointment dated 08.04.2025. However, Respondent No. 2 issued a show cause notice alleging discrepancies in his thumb impression during the examination. Subsequently, the matter was referred to CFSL, Bhopal, which vide report dated 16.01.2026 found the handwriting and signatures to be genuine. Accordingly, Respondent No. 2, vide speaking order dated 21.07.2026, validated the applicant's candidature. Despite the same, the respondents have not issued the appointment letter, compelling the applicant to approach this Tribunal by filing the instant OA.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant had appeared in the examination for the post of Multi Tasking (Non-Technical) Staff conducted by the Staff Selection Commission in the year 2024 and was issued an offer of appointment dated 08.04.2025. However, due to certain discrepancies noticed during verification of his thumb impression and handwriting, his appointment was withheld. Thereafter, the applicant filed OA No. 795/2026, which was disposed of vide order dated 13.05.2026 with a direction to the respondents to decide his pending representation. In compliance thereof, the respondents passed an order dated 21.07.2026, holding the applicant's candidature to be genuine. However, despite the said finding, Respondent No. 3 has not issued the appointment letter till date,
ASHISH KUMAR
compelling the applicant to approach this Tribunal by filing the instant OA.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents seeks time to obtain necessary instructions in the matter.
6. We have considered the rival submissions and gone through the records.
7. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the nature of the grievance raised by the applicant and taking note of Annexure A-3, i.e., the letter dated 21.07.2026 issued by the Staff Selection Commission, we are of the considered opinion that the instant OA be disposed of with a direction to Respondent No. 3/competent authority to consider the grievance of the applicant raised through his representation dated 17.08.2026 and decide the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. With the aforesaid directions, the OA stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
(Manju Pandey) (Rajnish Kumar Rai) Member (Administrative) Member (Judicial)
(Ashish)
ASHISH KUMAR