D P Bhatia vs M/O Finance on 1 April, 2026

[Cites 7, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

D P Bhatia vs M/O Finance on 1 April, 2026

                                                                                                       1




                                                                                     CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
                                                                                        PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

                                                                                                   OA No.4600/2018

                                                                                                                     Reserved on: 10.03.2026
                                                                                                                  Pronounced on: 01.04.2026


  Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
  Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)

  Sh. D.P. Bhatia, Aged about 66 years,
  S/o late Sh. J.L. Bhatia,
  R/o BD-ID, DDA Flats,
  Munirka, New Delhi-110 067                                                                                            - Applicant

  (By Advocate: Mr. SK Gupta)

                                                                                                       VERSUS

  1.                                                                          Union of India through
                                                                              Secretary,
                                                                              Ministry of Finance,
                                                                              Department of Revenue,
                                                                              North Block, New Delhi

  2.                                                                          Chairman,
                                                                              Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs,
                                                                              Department of Revenue,
                                                                              Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi

  3.                                                                          Chief Commissioner,
                                                                              Central Excise & GST (Delhi Zone)
                                                                              C.R. Building, IP Estate,
                                                                              New Delhi

  4.                                                                          Sh. Rabinder Prabhakar,
                                                                              S/o Sh. HS Prabhakar,
                                                                              R/o Flat No.8022, Sector-B,
                                                                              Pocket-11, Vasant Kunj,
                                                                              New Delhi-110070                          - Respondents


  (By Advocates: Mr. Satish Kumar, Mr. Virendra Arora and Ms.
  Sangeeta Rani)




                                             1




LALIT LALIT
                         CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
                            PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI

                                     OA No.198/2017

                                                       Reserved on: 14.01.2026
                                                    Pronounced on: 04.02.2026

            Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J)
            Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A)

            Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj,
            Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway,
            Central Hospital, New Delhi,
            Aged about 47 years,
            R/o 158/16, Railway Colony,
            Basant Road, New Delhi-55                           - Applicant

            (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal)

                                       VERSUS

            1. Union of India,
               Through its Secretary,
               Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan,




GOSAI GOSAI
               New Delhi

            2. General Manager (P),
               Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

            3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad)
               Through its Chairman,
               DRM Office Complex,
               Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

            4. DRM (P)
               Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

            5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad,
               Working as Lab. Supdt.
               Sub Divisional Railway Hospital,
               Itarasi, MP

            6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt.,
               Northern Railway Divisional Hospital,
               Lucknow, UP

            7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt.,
               Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents

       (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr.
       Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5




  N N
                                                                                                           2




                                                                                                       ORDER

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

The present OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) quash and set aside the action of respondents in not placing the applicant in the Establishment Order No.21/8 dated 16.02.2018 whereas, name of many of his juniors have been incorporated;

(ii) direct the respondents to give the benefit of promotion/upgradation to the level of Superintendent w.e.f. 30.09.1996 i.e. the date from which the juniors were promoted along with all other benefits viz. fixation of pay, arrears, seniority and revision of pension etc.

(iii) May also pass any further order(s), direction(s) as be deemed just and proper to meet the ends of justice."

2. The brief facts as narrated by the applicant in this OA are that the applicant is a citizen of India and a retired Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise who superannuated on 30.04.2015. The applicant is aggrieved by the denial of benefit of promotion/upgradation to the post of Superintendent in Customs & Central Excise w.e.f. 30.09.1996, the date on which many of his juniors were promoted/upgraded on the basis of completion of more than 17 years of service in the grade of Inspector. The applicant was similarly placed, having rendered the requisite 17 years of service in the grade of Inspector. The post of Superintendent, Customs & Central Excise is a Group B post.

3. The applicant initially joined the Customs & Central Excise Department as an Inspector on 12.12.1978 after qualifying the All India Examination conducted by the Staff Selection Commission and was allotted Bombay Collectorate at the relevant time. In accordance 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 3 with the prevalent policy and instructions dated 20.05.1980 issued by the office of respondent no.2, the applicant applied for Inter- Collectorate (now Commissionerate) transfer to Delhi in the office of respondent no.3. The said request was acceded to, and the applicant joined the post of Inspector in Delhi on 02.04.1982. He was placed at the bottom of the seniority list of direct recruits of that year, i.e., 1982, at Sl. No. 204. The applicant does not dispute his seniority and is not claiming any benefit on that account.

4. It is submitted that due to acute stagnation in the cadre of Inspectors, the office of respondent no.2, with the approval of the Central Government, framed a policy whereby certain posts of Inspector were upgraded to the level of Superintendent and an equal number of posts were abolished. This policy was unique and not governed by Recruitment Rules, which otherwise required 8 years of service. Under this policy, Inspectors with 17 years or more of service who had not been promoted were to be granted upgradation to the level of Superintendent across India. Various incumbents, including juniors to the applicant, approached this Hon'ble Tribunal by filing OA No. 651/1997 (I.C. Joshi & Ors.), and vide order dated 26.08.1997 (Annexure-A-3), the Tribunal held that for the purpose of upgradation, length of service would be the governing factor and seniority would have no consequence.

5. The said judgment was challenged before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, which vide order dated 18.02.2009 (Annexure-A-4) upheld the Tribunal's decision. Thereafter, on an application for correction, the Hon'ble High Court vide order dated 09.04.2010 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 4 (Annexure-A-5) granted consequential benefits including seniority, pay fixation, and arrears. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while disposing of SLP (Civil) CC No. 17635-17636/2010, upheld the said judgment and clarified that consequential seniority benefits would apply to the concerned respondents. A subsequent SLP filed by the Union of India was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 12.12.2011 both on grounds of delay and merit.

6. In compliance, Establishment Order No. 30/2012 dated 31.01.2012 was issued. Further, in OA No. 338/PB/2012 (Balwinder Singh Matharoo & Ors.), the Hon'ble Chandigarh Bench allowed similar relief vide order dated 03.08.2012, which was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana and ultimately by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 23.02.2017 (Annexure-A-12). Consequently, a general circular dated 03.08.2017 (Annexure-A-13) was issued directing implementation of the said judgments in respect of all similarly situated persons, including non-petitioners.

7. The applicant had also approached this Tribunal in OA No. 1649/2013 seeking similar relief, which was allowed vide order dated 25.04.2014 (Annexure-A-11), directing the respondents to extend the same benefits as granted in I.C. Joshi's case. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, while deciding WP(C) No. 5868/2014 on 31.10.2017, held that while Inter-Commissionerate transferees would be placed at the bottom of seniority, their past service must be counted for determining eligibility, and juniors could be considered where seniors were ineligible.

1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

8. However, in compliance of the said directions, the respondents issued Establishment Order No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 (Annexure-A-1), whereby several juniors to the applicant, having seniority numbers 244, 340, 341, 343, 344, 346, 348, 350, 369, etc., were granted promotion/upgradation based on a review DPC held on 29.01.2018. The applicant, despite being senior (Sl. No. 204) and having more than 17 years of service including service rendered prior to transfer, was not granted the same benefit. There was no issue of unfitness in his case.

9. During the pendency of CP No. 270/2014, this Tribunal vide order dated 09.07.2018 (Annexure-A-15) granted liberty to the applicant to challenge the said Establishment Order. The applicant also filed CM No. 33468/2018 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi seeking clarification of order dated 31.10.2017, which was disposed of on 04.10.2018 with liberty to seek independent legal remedy.

10. It is submitted that various Commissionerates, including Chandigarh and others under respondent no.2, have already implemented the judgments in I.C. Joshi and Balwinder Singh Matharoo cases by granting antedated promotion to the post of Superintendent based on total length of service. Even in the cadre of Appraiser, similar benefit has been extended by counting past service rendered in earlier Commissionerates.

11. In these circumstances, the applicant, being similarly situated and senior to many beneficiaries, is entitled to the same benefit of antedated promotion. Denial of such benefit, despite consistent judicial pronouncements and administrative instructions, is 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

12. Counsel for the applicant contends that the impugned order dated 16.02.2018 is contrary to law and facts. Because the judgment dated 26.08.1997 in OA No. 651/1997 (I.C. Joshi & Ors.) attained finality upon dismissal of SLP by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on 12.12.2011. It is submitted that the extension of benefits to similarly situated persons attained finality upon dismissal of SLP on 23.02.2017 in Balwinder Singh Matharoo's case.

13. Counsel for the applicant submits that it is a settled principle that similarly situated persons must be granted the same relief without being compelled to litigate.

14. Counsel for the applicant also argues that the applicant cannot be denied upgradation when juniors have been granted such benefit based on completion of 17 years of service. The policy of upgradation based on 17 years of service has been consistently upheld and is independent of Recruitment Rules. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has directed counting of past service for eligibility, which has not been followed in the applicant's case. The similarly situated officers in other cadres and Commissionerates have been granted such benefits.

15. Counsel for the applicant contends that the respondents cannot adopt different yardsticks for similarly situated employees, and such action violates Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

16. Counsel for the official respondents has filed the Counter Affidavit and submitted that the contention of the applicant is that he is senior to various applicants in the case of I.C. Joshi & others and that those applicants have been accorded the benefit of promotion/upgradation, whereas no such benefit has been granted to the applicant in the present OA. In this regard, it is submitted that the benefit of I.C. Joshi's case, which had earlier been extended to various applicants, as on date stands reviewed in view of the Review DPC held on 29.01.2018 conducted on the basis of the principles laid down in the judgment dated 31.10.2017 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No. 2415/2014, 3520/2014, 5868/2014 and 2665/2015 in the cases of D.V. Sidhmukh, S.S. Dahiya, D.P. Bhatia (the present applicant) and R.S. Dhattarwal respectively.

17. It is further submitted that in view of the aforesaid judgment, the Review DPC held for granting notional promotion to the applicants of I.C. Joshi's case was reconsidered, and the seniors who were eligible were granted notional promotion, while the applicants of I.C. Joshi's case who were junior were adjusted against supernumerary posts. In view of the above, it is submitted that the benefit, extension of which has been claimed by the applicant, does not exist as on date.

18. It is reiterated that the benefit extended earlier to various applicants vide Review DPC held on 21.11.2011 has since been reviewed in light of the Review DPC held on 29.01.2018, conducted on the basis of the principles laid down in the judgment dated 31.10.2017 of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP (C) No. 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 8 2415/2014, 3520/2014, 5868/2014 and 2665/2015 in the cases of D.V. Sidhmukh, S.S. Dahiya, D.P. Bhatia (the present applicant) and R.S. Dhattarwal respectively. Accordingly, the Establishment Order No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 was issued on the basis of the said judgment.

19. It is further submitted that after the Hon'ble Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s). 5408-5409/2014 filed by the Union of India vide order dated 23.02.2017, a Review DPC was conducted and Establishment Order No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 was issued as per the interpretation of the judgment in I.C. Joshi's case as given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its judgments dated 31.10.2017 in WP (C) No. 2415/2014, 3520/2014, 5868/2014 and 2665/2015 in the cases of D.V. Sidhmukh, S.S. Dahiya, D.P. Bhatia (the present applicant) and R.S. Dhattarwal respectively and the judgment dated 02.03.2017 in W.P. (C) No. 5873/2016 in the case of N.D. Azad & Ors.

20. It is submitted that the Board's directions for implementation of the Hon'ble CAT Chandigarh Bench judgment in OA No. 338/PB/2012 were implemented by the Delhi Zone in accordance with the further interpretation given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its judgment dated 31.10.2017 in WP (C) No. 2415/2014, 3520/2014, 5868/2014 and 2665/2015 in the cases of D.V. Sidhmukh, S.S. Dahiya, D.P. Bhatia (the present applicant) and R.S. Dhattarwal respectively, and the same was duly intimated to the applicant vide office letter C.No. 11-3(24) CCA/CAT/2013 dated 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 9 31.07.2018 (Annexure-A-1) in response to his representation dated 15.01.2018.

21. It is further submitted that the Tribunal's order dated 03.08.2012 in OA No. 338/PB/2012, as interpreted by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Union of India Vs. N.D. Azad & Ors., and in its judgment in W.P. (C) No. 3415/2014, 3520/2014, 5868/2014 and 2565/2015 in the cases of D.V. Sidhmukh, S.S. Dahiya, D.P. Bhatia (the present applicant) and R.S. Dhattarwal respectively, clearly provides that on Inter-Commissionerate transfer, an officer would be placed at the bottom of the seniority list, but for the purpose of eligibility, the service rendered in the earlier Commissionerate would be counted, and that seniors who are eligible would be considered first for promotion, and only if there are vacant posts and seniors are not eligible, then juniors would be considered.

22. It is also submitted that the Board had issued letters F.No. A- 11012/01/96-Ad.IV dated 10.09.1996 and 29.05.1997, laying down guidelines for promotion to the grade of Superintendent. As per para 2 of the letter dated 10.09.1996, promotions to the upgraded posts of Superintendent of Central Excise were to be made following the laid down procedure, which included adherence to the seniority list of the zone and granting promotion to those Inspectors who had completed 8 years of eligibility service and fell within the zone of consideration based on the number of vacancies.

23. It is further submitted that the Board's directions dated 03.08.2017 were implemented in conjunction with the judgments in the cases of Shri B.S. Matharoo and Shri I.C. Joshi, read with the 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 10 interpretation given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Union of India Vs. N.D. Azad & Ors., and accordingly, promotions to the upgraded posts of Superintendent were to be made in accordance with extant Recruitment Rules, which provide for 8 years of eligibility service. It is submitted that promotions are granted based on the number of vacancies and the position of the Inspectors in the seniority list, and only if seniors are not eligible, juniors falling within the zone of consideration and fulfilling eligibility conditions are considered.

24. It is reiterated that the Board's directions for implementation of the CAT Chandigarh Bench judgment in OA No. 338/PB/2012 have been duly implemented by the Delhi Zone, and Establishment Order No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 was issued strictly in accordance with the interpretation of the judgment in I.C. Joshi's case as given by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in its judgments dated 31.10.2017 and 02.03.2017.

25. It is denied that the respondents have adopted two different yardsticks while dealing with similarly situated officers. It is submitted that the present Original Application is devoid of merit and is based on untenable grounds and is liable to be dismissed with exemplary costs in favour of the respondents and against the applicant.

26. Counsel for the private respondents has filed the Counter Affidavit and submitted that the impugned Order bearing No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 is perfectly legal and based upon the correct legal position as explained in I.C. Joshi's case and as 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 11 interpreted by this Learned Tribunal in the case of N.D. Azad (as upheld by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court), as well as the decision dated 31.10.2017 passed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in WP No. 5868/2014 in the case of the Applicant himself.

27. It is submitted that SLP CC No. 18748-18749/2011 (U.O.I. & Others vs I.C. Joshi & Others) was dismissed on the ground of delay only, without going into the merits of the case, and therefore does not lay down any binding precedent. It is further submitted that the decision in I.C. Joshi's case was in personam and its benefit cannot be claimed by fence-sitters like the Applicant who did not approach the Court for relief and instead waited for the outcome in other cases. The Applicant had acquiesced to the alleged wrongful order made in 1997.

28. It is also submitted that SLP No. 5408-5409/2014 (Union of India vs Balwinder Singh Matharoo) was dismissed in limine without going into the merits of the case and thus does not constitute a binding precedent. The promotion of the Applicant can now be considered only in light of the decisions of the Hon'ble Courts in the cases of N.D. Azad and the Applicant himself, which provide for consideration of his case on the basis of bottom seniority. On that basis, the Applicant does not fall within the zone of consideration for promotion w.e.f. 30.09.1996 and therefore cannot be promoted from that date.

29. The law relating to grant of benefit to similarly situated or identically placed officers was elaborated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Uttar Pradesh vs Arvind Kumar 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 12 Shrivastav (2015) 1 SCC 347, wherein the Hon'ble Court held that the principle is subject to well-recognized exceptions such as laches, delay, and acquiescence. It was observed that persons who did not challenge the wrongful action in time and woke up only after others succeeded cannot claim similar relief, and would be treated as fence- sitters. However, this exception would not apply where the judgment is in rem intended to benefit all similarly situated persons. Where the judgment is in personam, the benefit accrues only to the parties before the Court unless delay and acquiescence are satisfactorily explained.

30. It is submitted that the decisions in I.C. Joshi and Balwinder Singh Matharoo were in personam. The Applicant is not entitled to parity as he is a fence-sitter who filed the OA 16 years after the promotion order. The Applicant himself admitted that he had filed a representation against non-consideration of his promotion on 30.09.1996, but though an OA was filed by 11 officers, he did not pursue the matter further, thereby acquiescing in the alleged wrongful order.

31, It is further submitted that I.C. Joshi and others were promoted earlier vide Order dated 21.11.2011 without following due procedure (zone of consideration based on bottom seniority) only to avoid contempt proceedings. Their promotions were later confirmed vide Orders dated 31.01.2012 and 16.02.2018, after dismissal/disposal of SLPs on limited grounds. They were accommodated against supernumerary posts created pursuant to 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

32. In contrast, in the Applicant's case, there is a specific direction to consider his case on the basis of bottom seniority. Since he did not fall within the zone of consideration for promotion as on 30.09.1996, he could not be promoted vide Order dated 16.02.2018.

33. The contents of the relevant paragraph are denied. It is submitted that the Applicant has failed to appreciate the policy of upgradation correctly. The Central Board of Excise & Customs, with a view to remove stagnation in the cadre of Inspectors, decided to upgrade approximately 2000 posts of Inspectors to the cadre of Superintendents. The Board decided that these posts would be filled based on the seniority list maintained in each Commissionerate.

34. The policy of upgradation involved two steps: (i) determination of the number of posts to be upgraded in each Commissionerate, and

(ii) filling up of these upgraded posts. Since both cadres were zone- specific, promotional prospects varied across Commissionerates. In some Commissionerates, Inspectors with 14-15 years of service were promoted due to availability of vacancies, whereas in others, Inspectors with over 20 years of service remained stagnated.

35. To ensure equitable distribution and uniform stagnation levels, the Board allocated posts based on the number of officers whose names appeared above certain Direct Recruit batches (1980 batch for first phase and 1982 batch for second phase). However, this criterion of 17 or 16 years of service was only for determining the number of 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

36. It was clearly stipulated that promotions to upgraded posts would be made in accordance with Recruitment Rules, which required eight years of service and selection based on seniority-cum- fitness. The Tribunal in Narottam Rath & Others vs U.O.I. & Others held that Recruitment Rules must be strictly followed and that transferees who forfeited seniority cannot supersede their seniors despite having longer service. This decision was upheld in Civil Appeal No. 5357 of 2008 decided on 27.04.2011.

37. In the Applicant's own case, the Hon'ble High Court directed consideration in accordance with extant Recruitment Rules. There was no intention to promote all officers with 17 years of service on an All-India basis, as that would have disturbed inter-Commissionerate balance and cadre ratios.

38. The Tribunal in N.D. Azad held that while an inter- Commissionerate transferee loses seniority, he retains past service for eligibility purposes. This position was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Similarly, in the Applicant's case, the Hon'ble High Court directed that he be placed at the bottom of the seniority list, but his past service be counted for eligibility, and if vacancies exist and seniors are not eligible, juniors may be considered.

39. However, in the first phase, only 9 posts were sanctioned to the Delhi Zone, and the zone of consideration extended to 22 candidates. The Applicant, being at Serial No. 204, did not fall within this zone 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 15 and hence could not be considered for promotion. Even assuming the Applicant's interpretation of 17 years of service is accepted, that question arises only after he falls within the zone of consideration, which he does not.

40. It is also submitted that the case of Sh. Manjeet Lal Kaushal relates to fixation of seniority in the cadre of Appraisers in the year 2002 and is unrelated to the upgradation exercise of 1996-1997.

41. As regards the plea under Article 14, reliance is again placed on State of Uttar Pradesh vs Arvind Kumar Shrivastav (2015) 1 SCC 347, which clearly bars relief to fence-sitters affected by delay and acquiescence. The Applicant, having waited for years and filed the OA after an inordinate delay, is not entitled to claim parity with those who approached the Court in time.

42. Counsel for the applicant has filed the rejoinder affidavit and submitted that it is denied that the applicant has raised a question regarding the policy of upgradation including criteria/manner for allocation and filling up upgraded posts. It is submitted that this issue has already attained finality in the case of I.C. Joshi & Ors. (OA No.651/1997). The judgment in the case of I.C. Joshi was a judgment in rem and not in personam. The operative part of the order in the case of I.C. Joshi is as under:

"In the light of the findings above, the promotions to all the upgraded posts of Superintendents shall be made strictly by selection from among the candidates who possess the requisite number of years of regular service in the grade in accordance with the Recruitment Rules of the gradation list prepared on the basis of length of service in the grade."

LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

"We make it clear that since the posts of Superintendent are to be filled up in accordance with the statutory rules of 1986 and the Recruitment Rules states that the method of recruitment is selection, seniority in this regard will have no consequence. The respondents should proceed to make selection in accordance with the length of service and applying the principle of selection in such matters." Further, it was also held in the same paragraph that in this particular case, the length of service should be the principle to be applied for shortlisting the candidates on the basis of zone of consideration."

The present OA has been filed by the applicant herein challenging the action of the official respondents in not placing him in the Establishment Order No.21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 issued in pursuance of the order dated 31.10.2017 passed by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in WP(C) No.5868/2014. Such action on the part of the official respondents is violative of the principles of equality as envisaged under Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

43. It is further submitted that the relief claimed in the OA by the applicant herein is based on the order dated 03.08.2012 of Hon'ble CAT, Chandigarh Bench in OA No.338/PB/2012 filed by Sh. Balwinder Singh Matharoo & Ors. The said order dated 03.08.2012 attained finality when the SLP(C) No.5408-5409/2014 was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India vide order dated 23.02.2017. Subsequently, the official respondents issued letter F.No.C- 18012/19/2012-Ad.IIB dated 03.08.2017 addressed to all Cadre Controlling Authorities under CBEC stating therein: "The matter has been examined in the Board in consultation with DOPT. After dismissal of SLP, the matter has attained finality. It has, therefore, 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 17 been decided with the approval of competent authority to implement CAT, Chandigarh Bench order dated 03.08.2012 in OA No.338/PB/2012 in respect of all concerned (petitioners and non petitioners) under Central Board of Excise & Customs."

44. In continuation to the aforesaid letter dated 03.08.2017, the official respondents issued another letter dated 31.12.2019 addressed to all Cadre Controlling Authorities under CBIC clarifying the term "all concerned (petitioners and non petitioners)" as mentioned in the said letter. In paragraph 2 of the letter dated 31.12.2019, it has been stated as under: "Non petitioners would mean persons who are similarly situated and are eligible for promotion against the post of Superintendent, upgraded vide Department of Revenue's letter No.A-11012/01/96-Ad.IV dated 10.09.1996 and 29.05.1997 but have not sought any judicial remedy. The petitioners would be those officers who have approached an appellate forum for redressal."

45. It is noteworthy that the case of Balwinder Singh Matharoo related to the extension of benefit of I.C. Joshi's case. The Hon'ble High Court of Delhi took note of the Hon'ble CAT, Chandigarh Bench's order dated 03.08.2012 in his case in paragraph 6 of the order dated 02.03.2017 in WP(C) No.5873/2016 (Union of India & Ors. vs N.D. Azad & Ors.) and observed as under: "Our attention, in this regard, is drawn to the order dated 3 August, 2012 passed by the Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No.338/PB/2012. The applicants therein were identically situated as the respondent Nos. 1 to 3. It is pointed out that the authorities had 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

46. It is further submitted that the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in its order dated 31.10.2017 has neither laid down any new principle nor is it competent to do so after affirmation of the judgments of I.C. Joshi & Balwinder Singh Matharoo by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. The aforesaid order dated 31.10.2017 was passed to dispose of WP(C) No.5868/2014 filed by the official respondents challenging the favorable order dated 25.04.2014 in OA No.1649/2013 filed by the applicant herein. Operative portion of the order of this Hon'ble Tribunal is as under: "In view of the above position, we allow this OA and direct the respondents to extend the same benefits which we have granted the applicants in OA No.651/1997 Shri I.C. Joshi & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. (supra)."

47. Perusal of the aforesaid order dated 31.10.2017 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court reveals that the order of Hon'ble Tribunal dated 25.04.2014 has neither been quashed nor modified and the writ petition filed by the official respondents has been disposed of by directing the department to consider the case of the applicant herein by placing him at the bottom of the seniority list and duly counting the service rendered by him in the earlier Commissionerate for determining the eligibility for promotion to the post of Superintendent.

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

48. In view of the above-mentioned order dated 31.10.2017 of Hon'ble Delhi High Court, official respondents No.3 issued the impugned Order No.31/2018 dated 16.02.2018 based on the recommendations of the review DPC held on 29.01.2018 for implementation of the order dated 03.08.2012 of Hon'ble CAT, Chandigarh Bench and ordered re-fixation of seniority of 20 officers in the grade of Superintendent. Out of 20 officers (S.No.11 to 20), 10 officers/junior to the applicant herein having seniority Nos.244, 340, 341, 343, 344, 346, 350, 369 etc. have been granted promotion by way of upgradation w.e.f. 30.09.1996. But the applicant, being similarly placed and having seniority No.204 of the same seniority list, was not accorded the same benefit. Once the benefit of promotion/upgradation was given to 10 junior officers having 17 years' service (including the service rendered in the earlier Commissionerate), the applicant, having more than 17 years of service (including service rendered in the earlier Commissionerate), was also required to be given the same benefit and promoted w.e.f. 30.09.1996 subject to fitness. It is further submitted that the respondents cannot follow two yardsticks while dealing with the set of officers. Such action is clearly a violation of the principle of equality as envisaged under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. As such, the applicant has filed the present OA seeking a particular relief as mentioned therein.

49. Counsel for the respondents has filed an additional affidavit and submitted that the present case is not entitled to the relief sought by the applicant regarding promotion. It is submitted that 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

"The Applicant in the present OA is claiming to be at S.I No. 204 in the seniority list, and persons who were at S.I. No. 244 onwards were given promotion."

A precise explanation is being provided in this additional affidavit, including the background of the case and the correct reason for not granting promotion to the applicant.

50. In 1996, the Central Board of Excise & Customs (CBEC) decided, in order to remove stagnation in the cadre of Inspectors of Central Excise, to upgrade the posts of Inspectors to the cadre of Superintendents, with the condition that a corresponding number of posts in the grade of Inspectors would be abolished. The posts were allocated to each Commissionerate based on the Seniority Lists maintained locally. This exercise was carried out in two phases, in 1996 and 1997.

51. Promotions to the upgraded posts of Superintendents were granted in accordance with the extant Recruitment Rules to officers possessing the requisite eligibility service, in order of seniority within the zone. Inter Commissionerate Transferees (ICT) such as Shri I.C. Joshi & Others, who were transferred to Delhi Zone, were placed lower in the seniority list as they had lost pre-ICT length of service and were not considered for promotion above their seniors in Delhi Zone.

52. Subsequently, Shri I.C. Joshi & Others filed OA No. 651/1997 before the Hon'ble CAT, claiming that their entire length of service, 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 21 including pre-ICT service, should be counted. The Hon'ble CAT, vide order dated 26.08.1997, directed that selection should be made in accordance with length of service, stating:

"...To exclude these petitioners who are with 16/17 years of service in the regular grade is nothing but injustice. In the circumstances, length of service shall be the principle to be applied for shortlisting candidates on the basis of zone of consideration."

The order of the CAT was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi, noting that the Departmental Counsel did not appear for hearing. The Department's SLP against the said order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court on the ground of limitation.

53. The CAT order was implemented in Delhi Zone only for the original applicants, granting notional promotions based on entire length of service, including pre-ICT service, while limiting the implementation to the applicants of I.C. Joshi's case as per Board's letter dated 11.04.2013. This was in line with the Supreme Court's judgment in Narottam Rath & Ors (Civil Appeal No. 5357 of 2009), which restricted promotions to upgraded posts based on seniority.

54. Shri I.C. Joshi & Others were promoted w.e.f. 30.09.1996 in the Review DPC held on 21.11.2011, while local seniors promoted earlier against upgraded posts were promoted against supernumerary posts.

55. The Board extended the scope of I.C. Joshi's order to the case of Shri Balwinder Singh Matharoo & Others, following OA No. 338/PB/2012, and the Tribunal's decision was upheld by the 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

56. CBEC issued a circular dated 03.08.2017 extending the benefit of Matharoo's case to similarly situated persons, clarified further by letter dated 31.12.2019.

57. The applicants in the present OA were ICT to Delhi Zone and had filed OA No. 1649/2013 seeking extension of benefit of the I.C. Joshi order, being similarly placed. The Hon'ble CAT, relying on the earlier OA, directed:

"We allow this OA and direct the Respondents to extend the same benefits which we have granted to the applicants in OA No. 651/1997 - Sh I.C. Joshi & Ors vs. Union of India & Ors."

The Department filed Writ Petition No. 5868/2014 before the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. The Hon'ble Court, in its order dated 31.10.2017, directed that respondents on inter-commissionerate transfer should be placed at the bottom of the seniority list, but their service in earlier Commissionerates would be counted for eligibility. Vacant posts, if seniors were ineligible, could then be offered to juniors in accordance with extant rules.

58. The Board's directions of 03.08.2017 were implemented in conjunction with judgments in I.C. Joshi and B.S. Matharoo cases and read with interpretation by the Hon'ble High Court in Union of India vs N.D. Azad & Others. It was clarified that promotions to upgraded posts of Superintendents would be made according to extant rules, eligibility service, and zone of consideration. Juniors 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

59. Pursuant to the above, a Review DPC was held on 29.01.2018 to reinstate the original DPC held on 12.09.1996 for promotion to 09 upgraded posts in the first phase, review the DPC of 21.11.2011 accordingly, and adjust officers previously granted promotion in 2011 against supernumerary posts.

60. Following the Review DPC of 29.01.2018, Estt. Order No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 was issued, listing 20 officers, excluding Shri D.P. Bhatia and other co-applicants in OA No. 1649/2013.

61. In 1996, Delhi Zone upgraded 09 Inspector posts to Superintendent posts. Considering vacancies and SC/ST requirements, the zone of consideration was extended up to Sl. 55, and promotions were granted accordingly. Shri D.P. Bhatia, being very low in seniority as of 31.12.1993, did not fall within the zone of consideration and was thus not promoted in Estt. Order No. 21/2018.

62. Shri I.C. Joshi & Others continued to be included in Estt. Order No. 21/2018 against supernumerary posts, in accordance with the High Court directions. The order dated 31.10.2017 applied only to the respondents therein, and promotions of I.C. Joshi & Others could not be disturbed. Accordingly, the respondents submit that the applicant is not entitled to the relief sought in the present OA.

63. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and perused the pleadings available on record. 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

7. Kulbhushan Doval, Working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP - Respondents (Mr. Pradeep Kr. Sharma, Mr. Piyush Gaur for respondents 1 to 4, Mr. Somnath Bhattacharya with Mr. Pradeep Tripathi for respondents 4 & 5 N N 24 64 It is noticed that the foundation of the applicant's claim is based on an incorrect and selective reading of the judgment rendered in I.C. Joshi & Ors. vs Union of India and its subsequent extension in Balwinder Singh Matharoo case. The applicant has sought to contend that mere completion of 17 years of service in the grade of Inspector conferred upon him an automatic and enforceable right to be promoted or upgraded to the post of Superintendent w.e.f. 30.09.1996, irrespective of his position in the seniority list. This interpretation is fundamentally flawed and runs contrary to the consistent judicial position subsequently clarified by the Delhi High Court, particularly in N.D. Azad & Ors. vs Union of India as well as in the applicant's own case.

65. A careful reading of the judicial pronouncements would show that while the benefit of counting past service rendered in the previous Commissionerate was indeed recognized for the limited purpose of determining eligibility, the process of promotion itself was never detached from the statutory Recruitment Rules governing the post of Superintendent. These rules clearly mandate that promotions are to be effected on the basis of seniority-cum-fitness within the zone of consideration and subject to availability of vacancies. The High Court, while interpreting the earlier judgments, has unequivocally held that inter-commissionerate transferees would be placed at the bottom of the seniority list in the new Commissionerate, and although their past service would be counted for eligibility, their consideration for promotion would still depend upon their position in the seniority list and whether they fall within the prescribed zone of 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

66. In the present case, it is an admitted and undisputed fact that the applicant, upon seeking inter-commissionerate transfer, was placed at Sl. No. 204 in the seniority list of the Delhi Zone. The number of upgraded posts available in the relevant period was extremely limited, and the zone of consideration extended only up to a much higher position in the seniority list, even after being relaxed to accommodate reserved category requirements. The applicant, being far below this zone, was never within the field of consideration for promotion in the first place. Therefore, the question of granting him promotion or upgradation w.e.f. 30.09.1996 simply does not arise.

67. The applicant has sought to draw support from the fact that certain officers, allegedly junior to him, were granted notional promotion. However, this argument is equally misconceived. Those officers were either within the zone of consideration based on seniority or were extended specific relief pursuant to judicial orders passed in their favour, particularly in the earlier round of litigation. In certain cases, they were accommodated against supernumerary posts created to give effect to court directions. Such exceptional and case-specific arrangements cannot be invoked by the applicant to claim parity as a matter of right. It is a settled principle of law that Article 14 does not envisage negative equality, and a benefit extended 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

68. The reliance placed by the applicant on Article 14 of the Constitution of India is therefore misplaced. Equality operates within the framework of law and cannot be invoked to bypass statutory rules or binding judicial interpretations. The respondents have acted strictly in accordance with the Recruitment Rules and the law as clarified by the High Court, and hence no arbitrariness or discrimination can be attributed to their action. On the contrary, granting the relief sought by the applicant would itself amount to violating the established principles governing promotion and would disturb the settled seniority structure.

69. Another significant aspect which disentitles the applicant from any relief is the inordinate delay and acquiescence on his part. The cause of action, if any, arose in the year 1996, when the promotions to the upgraded posts were initially made. However, the applicant chose not to pursue his remedies diligently and approached the judicial forum after an unexplained and substantial lapse of time. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in State of Uttar Pradesh vs Arvind Kumar Srivastava has clearly held that persons who remain silent and do not challenge an alleged wrong within a reasonable time, and who wake up only after seeing others succeed in litigation, are to be treated as fence-sitters and are not entitled to claim the benefit of such judgments. The present case squarely falls within this principle, and the applicant's claim is liable to be rejected on this ground alone. 1 LALIT LALIT CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

70. Furthermore, the contention that the judgments in I.C. Joshi (supra) and Balwinder Singh Matharoo (supra) are judgments in rem and automatically applicable to all similarly situated persons is incorrect. The subsequent judicial interpretation has clarified the scope and manner of implementation of these judgments, and the respondents have faithfully implemented the same through the Review DPC held in 2018. The Establishment Order No. 21/2018 dated 16.02.2018 has been issued after due consideration of all relevant factors, including the applicable rules, judicial directions, and the seniority position of the officers concerned. There is no illegality, arbitrariness, or infirmity in the said order warranting interference by this Tribunal.

71. In view of the foregoing discussion, it is evident that the applicant has failed to establish any legal right to claim promotion or upgradation w.e.f. 30.09.1996. His claim is based on a misinterpretation of judicial precedents, overlooks the binding effect of Recruitment Rules, ignores his own position in the seniority list, and is further vitiated by delay and acquiescence. The relief sought, if granted, would not only be contrary to law but would also unsettle the settled position and create administrative anomalies. Accordingly, the present Original Application deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed. No order as to costs.




  (Dr. Sumeet Jerath)                                                                                        (Harvinder Kaur Oberoi)
  Member (A)                                                                                                        Member (J)

  /lg/




                                           1




LALIT LALIT

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI OA No.198/2017 Reserved on: 14.01.2026 Pronounced on: 04.02.2026 Hon'ble Ms. Harvinder Kaur Oberoi, Member (J) Hon'ble Dr. Sumeet Jerath, Member (A) Balwan Singh Mehta, S/o Sh. Prem Raj, Lab. Supdt. In Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi, Aged about 47 years, R/o 158/16, Railway Colony, Basant Road, New Delhi-55 - Applicant (By Advocate: Mr. Anil Singal) VERSUS

1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Railways, Rail Bhawan, GOSAI GOSAI New Delhi

2. General Manager (P), Northern Railway, Baroda House, New Delhi

3. Railway Recruitment Board (Allahabad) Through its Chairman, DRM Office Complex, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad

4. DRM (P) Northern Railway, Lucknow, UP

5. Mahesh Chandra Bhimavad, Working as Lab. Supdt.

Sub Divisional Railway Hospital, Itarasi, MP

6. Mahavir Pandit, working as Lab. Supdt., Northern Railway Divisional Hospital, Lucknow, UP

Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi

D P Bhatia vs M/O Finance on 1 April, 2026