CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M. Swaminathan, J, Sisir Kumar Ratho, A
R. Kumarasean – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER
(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. M. Swaminathan, Judicial Member)
This MA has been filed by the applicant to condone the delay of 21 years, 6 months and 2 days in filing the Original Application.
2. The relief sought by the applicant in the OA is as follows:
“i) call for the records related to the Railway Board order in respect of Note 7 of Rule 7 and Rule 8 of the Railway Services (Revised) Pay Rules, 1986, dated19.09.1986, the A-9 Notification on the subject of Pay Fixation on stepping up of pay on par with juniors pay and after adding due increment before fixing the pay in revised pay and the A-7 rejection order No. U/P.721/GA/TN/24/99 dated20.04.1999 not allowing the option for allowing the increment due on 01.01.1986 before fixing the pay in the revised scale and to set aside the same as the A-7 decision is contradicting pay commission fixation Rules Note 7 of 7 and 8 of the principle of natural justice and Article 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India ;
ii) issue of Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus or any other appropriate writ or orders or directions, in the nature of Writ direct the respondents to fix thepay of the applicants as per the option and the A-4 fixation proposal a
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.