Disposed

Vishakha Prashant Bhagwat v. Central Railway

CAT11 Sept 2026O.A./154/2026

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Central Administrative Tribunal, without adjudicating merits, disposed of an old-age pension petition by directing the applicant to submit a fresh representation to the respondents along with a specific Government Office Memorandum for reconsideration within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directions to applicant to submit fresh representation with specific Office Memorandum; respondents to pass reasoned order within six weeks.

Vishakha Prashant Bhagwat vs Central Railway — Pension and Retirement Benefits | CAT (2026)

¶1

¶2

Central Administrative Tribunal Mumbai Bench : Camp at Nagpur

¶3

OA No.154 of 2026

¶4

Dated this the 11^th day of September, 2026 Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J) Hon’ble Mr. Braj Mohan Agrawal, Member (A)

¶5

Vishakha w/o Prash a nt Bhagwat Aged 50 years, Occu - Service C/o Kalicharan Gha r de Sadhhu Mohalla, In d ora Nagpur - 440004

¶6

….Applicant

¶7

(By Advocate : Shri S .V. Banerjee)

¶8

Versus

¶9

1. Union of India, Through G.M. Central Railway Mumbai - PIN 400001

¶10

(2) Principal Chief P ersonnel Officer Central Railway Mumbai - PIN 400001

¶11

(3) Sr. Divisional P e rsonnel Oficer Central Railway Nagpur - PIN 4 4 0001

¶12

… . Respondents

¶13

(By Advocate : Shri N .P. Lambat)

¶14

Digitally signed by RAVI KANOJIADN: C=IN, CN=RAVI KANOJIA, L=Central Delhi, O=CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL PRINCIPAL BENCH, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal PRINCIPAL Bench, ST=Delhi, E=[email protected], postalCode=110001, serialNumber=12da7dfe98e77c92dda4af6c196687700e5cc7e2bcc4fe78d730f8470c3e9a4f, street=61/35, COPERNICUS MARG, NEW DELHI 110001, telephoneNumber=5b491534ade0b015fafa6f7185daf00161f030b0bc4a2fa0c67dd30bd5b99ab9Reason: I am the author of this documentLocation: Date: 2026.09.12 12:56:46+05'30'Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2026.2.0

RAVI KANOJIA

O R D E R

Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J):

¶19

By filing t h e present OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tri b unals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:

¶20

“(i) That the Ho n 'ble Tribunal after examining the legality and validity be p l eased to direct the Respondents to issue n ecessary orders in te r ms of guidelines and letter dated o2.0 4 .2024 to cover the a p plicant under Railway Services (Pensi o n) Rules, 1993 in plac e of National Pension System.

¶21

(ü) That the Ho n 'ble Tribunal be pleased to direct the Res p ondents to include th e name of the applicant in the Old Pensio n Scheme by accepting her request for the opportunity to switch over to Old Pension S cheme.

¶22

(iii) Grant any o t her relief as may deem fit and proper in t he facts and circums t ances of the case in the favour of applica n t by the Hon'ble Trib u nal.”

¶23

The claim o f the applicant has been conte s ted by the respondents by filing written statement. The applicant h as also filed rejoinder and the m a tter is listed for final hearing today . 3. At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submits that during the penden cy of the instant OA, Govt. of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Departme n t of Pension and Pensioners’ w elfare has issued an OM No.57/05/2021P&PW(B)/Compass i onate/10593 dated 22.06.2026. He submits that if the claim o f the applicant as raised in the p r esent OA is considered by the r e spondents in the light of the afore s aid OM, the applicant shall be s a tisfied.

RAVI KANOJIA

In view of t he aforesaid position, without go i ng into the merits of the case, t he present OA is disposed of with t he following directions:

¶28

(i) The applicant s h all be at liberty to make a represe n tation to the competent aut h ority amongst the respondents for redressal of his grievances, w ith such representation, the appli c ant will also bring to the no t ice of the respondents the aforesa i d OM dated 22.06.2026, wi t hin three weeks on receipt of a cer t ified copy of this Order; and

¶29

(ii) If such represe n tation along with the aforesaid O M is received by the compe t ent authority amongst the respo n dents, such authority shall c onsider the claim of the applicant i n the light of the said OM a nd pass a reasoned and speaki n g order as expeditiously as possible and preferably within s ix weeks of receipt of such r epresentation from the applicant.

¶30

The OA stan d s disposed of in the aforesaid terms. 6. No costs.

¶31

Pending MA(s), if any, stands disposed of accord i ngly.

¶32

(Braj Mohan Agrawal) ( R.N. Singh) Member (A) Member (J)

¶33

/ravi/

¶34

¶35

RAVI KANOJIA

Vishakha Prashant Bhagwat v. Central Railway

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vishakha Prashant Bhagwat v. Central Railway

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Prajakta Prashant Wade vs Central Railway

Dilip Deorao Ukey vs Central Railway

Atul Sirjerao Thakare vs Central Ground Water Board

Prashik Anil Ramteke vs Income Tax Department

Shishir Kumar Sirvastava vs Union of India

Vijay Kumar vs Union of India

Dilip Kumar Pandey vs Union of India

Atul Mishra vs Secretary