Disposed

Deepak Chand v. Northern Railway

CAT15 Sept 2026O.A./845/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Central Administrative Tribunal directed the respondent railway authority to consider the applicant's pending representation within two weeks regarding the non-issuance of his medical card. The authority is directed to pass a reasoned order within three months, disposing of the original application by this process.

What did the court decide?

Directive to consider pending representation and pass reasoned order within three months; pending MAs deemed disposed.

Deepak Chand vs Northern Railway — Pension and Retirement Benefits | CAT (2026)

¶1

Open Court

¶2

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD

¶3

¶4

Original Application No. 845 of 2024

¶5

Allahabad this the 15^th day of September, 2026

¶6

Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member-J

¶7

Deepak Chand Son of Late Kishori, Resident of 266 Sadar Bazar, District Varanasi.

¶8

Applicant

¶9

By Advocate: Shri Rama Kant Yadav

¶10

Vs.

¶11

General Manager, Northern Railway, Hazaratganj, Lucknow.

¶12

Divisional Manager, Northern Railway, Hazaratganj, Lucknow.

¶13

Divisional Commercial Manager, Northern Railway, Lucknow.

¶14

Respondents

¶15

By Advocate: Shri R.C. Sahu

¶16

O R D E R

¶17

Shri Rama Kant Yadav, counsel for the applicant and Shri R.C. Sahu, counsel for the respondents are present and heard.

¶18

MANISH MEHROTRA

¶19

Counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was retired from the post of T.C./Commercial while working in the Office of Divisional Commercial Manager, Northern Railway, Lucknow on 31.08.2015. He submitted that the applicant’s main grievance is against the non-issuance of medical card. However, the applicant has also raised his grievance regarding non-fixation of salary as per recommendation of 6^th Pay Commission as well as 7^th Pay Commission. Therefore, he has moved the representation dated 31/05/2024 before the competent authority amongst the respondents for granting him the increments and further for payment of salary. He further submitted that the requisite amount for issuing medical was deposited by the applicant as Rs.9080/-, however, till date same has not been issued. Therefore, he is seeking direction upon

¶20

¶21

the respondents’ authority to consider his pending representation dated 31.05.2024.

¶22

Counsel for the respondents vehemently opposed the contention of applicant’s counsel and submitted that the fixation of increment as well as 15 days’ salary is misconceived. However, the respondents are accepting non-issuance of medical card to the applicant in para-7 of the counter affidavit. He further submitted that if the applicant approaches to the office of respondents’ authority, in such a situation, the medical card will be issued in accordance with law.

¶23

In view of above submissions of counsel for the parties, I am of the opinion to dispose of the O.A. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to move a comprehensive representation before the respondents within two weeks from today with regard to non-issuance of medical card and appear before the authority concerned and thereafter the competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider the comprehensive representation so moved by the applicant, in accordance with extant rules, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of three months from the date of receipt of comprehensive representation along with a certified copy of this Order. The decision so taken on the representation of applicant shall be intimated to him forthwith. With the aforesaid direction, O.A. stands disposed of. All the pending MAs shall be deemed to have been disposed of. No order as to cost.

¶24

(Rajnish Kumar Rai) Member (Judicial)

¶25

/M.M/

¶26

MANISH MEHROTRA

Deepak Chand v. Northern Railway

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Deepak Chand v. Northern Railway

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Arif Ramzan Parray vs General Administrative Department

Mohammad Shafi Sofi vs Health and Medical Education Department

Subhan Ali vs Department of Posts

Ravi Kant Pandey vs Department of Defence Production

Suraj Bhan vs Ordnance Factory

Firdous Ahmad Giri vs Home Department

K K Umadevi vs the General Manager Southern Railway Hq Office Park Town Chennai

Mahesh Kumar vs General Manager, N E Rly