(Reserved on 29.09.2025)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Jabalpur, this the ^……….. day of December, 2025 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SMT. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Original Application No. 887 of 2016 Manoj Kumar, S/o Ram Lal, Age 39 years, Working as PA-II, Deputy Commandant, JAK Rif., Redgimental Center, Jabalpur.

Applicant Advocate for the applicant: Shri Ajay Pal Singh V e r s u s

1. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Defence, Sena Bhawan, New Delhi - 110011.

2. Director General, General Staff Branch, Army Headquarters, DHQ, New Delhi. 110011.

3. Commandant, JAK Rif., Regimental Center, Jabalpur 482001 -Respondents Advocate for the Respondents :Shri S.P.Singh

O R D E R

Smt. Mallika Arya, Administrative Member:-

The instant Original Application has been filed under section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act 1985.

2. The facts of the case, in brief, are that the applicant was appointed as Stenographer in the year, 2005 in the Respondents’ Department. Initially there were three cadres of Stenographer i.e. I, II and III. However, in the year 2011 cadre of Stenographer-II was merged with Stenographer-I. The seniority list of the applicant is as per Annexure A/1. The respondents were required to hold DPC for two vacancies in the year, 2011 as per SRO 86 dated 20.12.2011 (Annexure A/2). Hence, the applicant was eligible for promotion in the year 2011. There was a direction by respondent No. 2 for filling up these vacancies vide order dated 24.01.2011 (Annexure A/3). Applicant submitted his willingness on 06/04/2011 to be considered for the said post. However, no action was taken by the respondents.

Thereafter, the respondents changed the nomenclature of the Stenographer Cadre and passed an order dated 26/09/2012 (Annexure A/5). Respondent No. 3 wrote a letter dated 10/09/2013 to Respondent No. 2 for holding the DPC (Annexure A/6) but no action was taken. The applicant sought information under Right to Information Act, 2005 vide an application dated 16/06/2015 seeking information regarding holding of DPC (Annexure A/7). Respondents submitted a reply dated 21/7/2015. Applicant was informed that the DPC could not be held because of technical delay on behalf of Respondent No. 2 (Annexure A/8). Applicant has submitted that it has been 5 years since he got his promotion and DPC should have been held every year so that the benefit of promotion could be given to the employees. Applicant’s further representation dated 04.05.2016 is as per Annexure (A/9).

3. Accordingly, the applicant has prayed that he should have been considered for promotion in the year 2011 at the time when vacancies were available as the applicant fulfilled the eligibility criteria. Hence, the applicant has prayed for issuance of the writ of mandamous to the respondents to consider the application for promotion to the post of Stenographer Gr.-I with all consequential benefits along with interest on arrears.

4. The respondents have given their reply. They have strongly opposed the contention of the O.A. They have submitted that the applicant cannot claim promotion as a matter of right. However, he has a right to be considered for promotion as and when the vacancy arises and he fulfills the criteria for promotion. If he falls in the zone of consideration then he has a right to be considered. He cannot claim promotion on the ground that the respondents should hold DPC every year as per rules. Applicant has given no documentary evidence to support his contention that DPC has not been held every year. Hence the OA is liable to be dismissed on this ground itself. The post of Stenographer Grade-III was merged with Stenographer Grade-II in the year 2011 vide MOD’s letter No. 410/2009-D (Civ-I) dated 27.02.2013. The applicant initially was rd employed Stenographer Grade-III w.e.f. 3 Oct 2005 in the establishment of JAK LI Regiment Centre on compassionate grounds. Applicant got promoted from the Grade