Central Administrative Tribunal
Ashok Kumar Singh vs EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY on 3 November 2026
Open Court
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH
ALLAHABAD
Allahabad this, the 03rd day of November, 2026
Original Application No. 1177 of 2026
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member Judicial
Ashok Kumar Singh, S/o Hardev Narayan Singh, R/o Ward Kai Mahal, Post Office Mughalsari, District Chandauli . . .Applicant By Advocate :Mr. Shiv Mangal Prajapati V E R S U S
1.
Union of India, through the General Manager, East Central Railway, Hazipur, Bihar
2.
Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway, DDU
3.
Senior Divisional Personal Officer, East Central Railway, DDU
4.
Senior Divisional Finance Manager, East Central Railway, DDU
. . .Respondents
By Advocate: Shri Anil Kumar
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
Heard Shri Shiv Mangal Prajapati, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned Counsel for the official respondents and with the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is being disposed of at the admission stage.
2. This Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 has been filed by the applicant for the following reliefs:-
8. (i) Issue an order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the impugned order/letter dated 28.01.2026 issued from the office of Senior Divisional Personal Officer, East Central Railway, DDU for recovery/deduction of Rs.1910271/- from the retiral benefits of the applicant in the head and name of payment of settlement dues and seeking further relief directing the respondents to refund the deducted amount from the retiral benefits of the applicant as well as to fix the original pay scale of the applicant at the rate of Rs.53600/- at the time of retirement.
3. At the very outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the representation of the applicant dated 23.02.2026, which is at Annexure-3 (appended at Page 25-26), is pending before PUNIT KUMAR MISHRA
the respondents, but the respondents have neither shown any consideration nor any order has been passed on the said representation. He further submits that he would satisfy, if a direction is issued upon the respondent concerned to dispose of the said pending representation of the applicant, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within stipulated time as fixed by this Tribunal.
4. On the other hand, learned counsel for the official respondents has no objection if a direction is issued for disposing of pending representation of the applicant, in accordance with law, within stipulated time.
5. In view of the submissions of the learned counsel for both the parties and without going into the merits of the case, instant Original Application stands disposed of with a direction upon the competent Authority amongst the respondents to consider the pending representation/reply of the applicant dated 23.02.2026, which is at Annexure-3 (appended at Page 25-26) and to pass an appropriate decision, by way of reasoned and speaking order, under intimation to the applicant, in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order.
6. No order as to costs.
7. Pending M.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
(Justice Rajiv Joshi)
Member (J)
PM/
PUNIT KUMAR MISHRA