SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 3743

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
10170/2025


ORDER

Hon’ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J):

The issue involved in all the Original Applications is identical and therefore, with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties, all the captioned OAs were heard together and are being disposed of by a common order. However, for the purpose of the present order, the facts are being taken from OA No. 1391/2025 (Anil Kumar) treating the same as the lead case.

2. Brief facts of the case are that both the applicants were appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the years 1997 and 2000 respectively. After rendering six years of regular service as Junior Engineer (Civil), both the applicants became eligible for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) as per the Recruitment Rules circulated on 01.07.2004. Although both the applicants had completed the required years of service for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) in the years 2003 and 2010 respectively, they were not considered for promotion to the said post for want of vacancies.

3. Their claims for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil) were eventually considered in the years 2010 and 2013 respectively. As both the applicants had outstand

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top