Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore

Umesh L Halkar vs Department Of Atomic Energy on 6 November, 2025

                                          1
                                                   O.A No./386/2025/CAT/BANGALORE




                         CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

                           BANGALORE BENCH, BENGALURU

                                   O.A NO.170/00386/2025

                           Dated this the 6th day of November, 2025

                  CORAM:

                  HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)
                  HON'BLE DR. SANJIV KUMAR, MEMBER (A)


           Sri Sh. Umesh L Halkar,
           S/o Lingappa
           Aged about 65 years,
           Scientific Assistant-E
           (now retired),
           Nuclear Power Corporation of India Ltd.,
           Kaiga Plant Site.
           Kaiga,
           Karwar, PIN 581 400.
           Residing at No.119K(2),
           Site 4, Navachetan Retirement
           Township, Santigodu,
           Puttur, Dakshina Kannada,
           PIN 574 202,
           Karnataka.                                        ......Applicant

           (By Advocate: Shri.Yodh Singh- not present)

                   Vs.

           Represented by the Site Director
           Department of Atomic Energy,
           Nuclear Power Corporation
           India Limited (NPCIL) through
           Kaiga Generating Station,
           Kaiga Plant Site.




        SHAINEY
SHAI VIJU
     CAT
NEY Bangalore
     2025.11.11
VIJU +05'30'
     17:05:49
                                             2
                                                      O.A No./386/2025/CAT/BANGALORE


           Karwar,
           Karnataka-581400.                                      .....Respondent


                                       O R D E R (ORAL)

                          PER: JUSTICE S. SUJATHA, MEMBER (J)

The matter was called twice. Even in the second round, there is no representation on behalf of the applicant.

2. It is discernible from the order sheet of 11.8.2025 that the Original Application was dismissed for non-prosecution. Subsequently, considering M.A 381/2025 filed by the applicant seeking restoration of the Original Application, the order of this Tribunal dated 11.8.2025 was re-called and the matter was restored to file subject to the applicant complying with the office's objections by one week from 21.8.2025 i.e., the passing of the order of restoration, failing which, to list the matter before the Bench for passing appropriate orders.

3. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 11.9.2025, 24.9.2025, 21.10.2025. On consecutive dates of hearing, neither there is appearance on behalf of the applicant nor office objections are cured. Even today there is no representation. SHAINEY SHAI VIJU CAT NEY Bangalore 2025.11.11 VIJU +05'30' 17:05:49 3 O.A No./386/2025/CAT/BANGALORE

4. It appears that the applicant is not serious in prosecuting the matter. Accordingly, the Original Application stands dismissed.

No order as to costs.

                             Sd/-                                 Sd/-
                     (DR. SANJIV KUMAR)                  (JUSTICE S. SUJATHA)
                          MEMBER (A)                          MEMBER (J)

              /SV/




        SHAINEY
SHAI VIJU
     CAT
NEY Bangalore
     2025.11.11
VIJU +05'30'
     17:05:49