Union of India Vs Satyabrata Dhupal

02. The Union Government and its officials are knocking at the doors of the Writ Court for assailing the order dated 10.02.2023 whereby the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack having favoured Opposite Parties O.A. No.260/00263 of 2021 has granted relief to him in following terms:

¶15

“6. We find that the CAT, PB, New Delhi and the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has vividly discussed the matter in great detail and came to the conclusion on principle that once the posts/scales were merged, it cannot be treated as promotion and in terms of para 5 of MAC all promotions from Mistries to JE (erstwhile 1400-2300) has to be ignored for the purpose of MACP. Thus, the stand of the respondents that since the

¶16

Page 1 of 3

¶17

applicants are from PWM/PWS which are excluded from para 13(a) but dealt with para 13(b] and 13.2 to 13.5 of RBE No.177/2003 and para 13(a) is applicable to Works Wing of Civil Engineering Department and not for Permanent Way Wings the decision is not applicable, is found to be not correct. As a consequence, it is held that the applicants were rightly allowed the first and second financial upgradation on the recommendation of the screening committee vide order under Annexure-A/1, which ought not to have been altered without giving opportunity of being heard to the applicants in compliance with the principles of natural justice. However, in course of hearing, it has been brought to the notice of this Bench that the respondents had filed Special Leave to Appeal (C) No.11520-11521/2018 challenging the order of the CAT, PB, New Delhi, which was upheld by the Hon'ble High Court of New Delhi and the Hon'ble Apex Court vide order dated 08.10.2018 stayed the proceedings of the contempt in C.P.No. 278/2018 filed by the applicants therein before the CAT, PB New Delhi and directed to list the matter in first week of December, 2018 for final disposal and the matter seems to be pending before the Hon'ble Apex Court for final adjudication. Since the matter is pending for final adjudication before the Hon'ble Apex Court, the restoration of the MACP granted to the applicants under A/1 series shall be subject to the final outcome of the Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 1152011521/2018. Insofar as recovery is concerned, the respondents are directed not to effect recovery in the event of submission of an undertaking by the applicants that they will not claim any equity and to refund the excess payment made in the event the Special Leave to Appeal (C) No. 11520-11521/2018 is allowed.”

¶18

Learned counsel for the Opposite Parties submits that the view taken by CAT, Cuttack in impugned order is similar to the one taken by CAT, Delhi in O.A. No.1386 of 2013; the Delhi CAT order was put in challenge before the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in W.P. No.10995 of 2016

¶19

Page 2 of 3

¶20

and the same came to be dismissed vide order dated 21.11.2016; further, the challenge carried in SLP (C) Diary No.11520-11521 of 2018 and the apex Court vide order dated 18.01.2024 put imprimatur to the order of Delhi CAT as affirmed by the Delhi High Court.

¶21

The counsel further submits that in view of this development these contentions cannot be considered in the present petition. This is not disputed by the Senior Panel Counsel, who only seeks time to ascertain if any review petition is filed or not. On that ground, the request of adjournment cannot be acceded to, at this length of time.

¶22

In the above circumstances, this petition being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and accordingly it is. The order of the CAT, Cuttack is to be acted upon by the Opposite Parties within eight (8) weeks.

¶23

No costs.

¶24

Registry to send a copy of this order to the Opposite Parties by speed post for their information.

¶25

(Dixit Krishna Shripad) Judge

¶26

(Chittaranjan Dash) Judge

¶27

Signature Not Verified

¶28

Digitally Signed Signed by: PRASANT KUMAR SAHOOPrasanta Designation: Personal Assistant Reason: Authentication Location: Orissa High Court Date: 13-Jan-2026 13:54:27

¶29

Page 3 of 3

Union of India v. Satyabrata Dhupal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India v. Satyabrata Dhupal

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Union of India Vs Sk. Kudrat Ali

Union of India Vs Amiya Kanti Patnaik

Parsuram Routray Vs the Kendrapara Urban Co-Operative Bank Ltd., Kendrapara