Petition challenging a CAT order directing verification of whether respondents were similarly situated to Sudama Singh applicants and grant of pay-scale benefits from 01.01.1996 with arrears. The High Court found no merit, noting identical submissions were rejected in its earlier Sanjoy Kar judgment, and dismissed the petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~19
Date of decision: 12.12.2025
Through: Mr. Satya Ranjan Swain, CGSC with Mr. Kautilya Birat, Mr.Ankush Kapoor and Mr.Vishwadeep
versus
LAW EDIFYING GROUP AND ORS .....Respondents
Through: Ms. Sumita Hazarika and Mr.Prakhar Gupta, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN
NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (ORAL)
“8. In these circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that the ends of justice would be met if the instant OA is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to verify whether the applicants are similarly situated employees as the applicants in Sudama Singh's
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA W.P.(C) 18854/2025 NEGI Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 20:10:45
Page 1 of 3
case (supra), and if they are so found, in that eventuality, grant them the similar benefits as have been extended to the applicants in Sudama Singh's case (supra) i.e. benefits of appropriate pay scales w.e.f. 01.01.1996, with payment of arrears of salary, but without the obligation of payment of interest. We order accordingly.
9. The respondents are further directed to complete the exercise, as ordained above, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.”
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA W.P.(C) 18854/2025 NEGI Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 20:10:45
Page 2 of 3
Ors. v. Sanjoy Kar & Ors., 2025:DHC:10661-DB, and similar petitions were dismissed.
NAVIN CHAWLA, J
MADHU JAIN, J
DECEMBER 12, 2025 /ys/ P/SS
Signature Not Verified
Signed By:RENUKA W.P.(C) 18854/2025 NEGI Signing Da te:1 6.12.2025 20:10:45
Page 3 of 3
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal erred in directing pay-scale benefits similar to Sudama Singh despite relief being confined to that case's parties
Whether the Tribunal rightly disregarded the belatedness of respondents' claim and interference in pay fixation matters
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Sudama Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors.Referred
Sudama Singh & Ors. v. Union of India & Ors., O.A. No. 925/2003
Union of India v. P.V. HariharanReferred
(1997) 3 SCC 568 · Who else cites this
Union of India and Ors. v. Sanjoy Kar & Ors.Followed
2025:DHC:10661-DB
Union of India and Ors.
Law Edifying Group and Ors.
Navin Chawla
Madhu Jain
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
