Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985

18 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

DR. ASWATHY R. S. KARTHIKA & ORS.versusDR. ARCHANA M. & ORS.

2020 INSC 47029 July 2020Appeal(s) allowed

The appellants, members of the Hindu Nadar community, sought to have the shortfall in the 1% reservation granted to their community (effective from 21‑Nov‑2009) adjusted in future vacancies without disturbing earlier appointments. They argued that Rule 15(a) of the Kerala State and Subordinate Service Rules, 1958, whic

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusINDU LAL AND ORS.

2002 INSC 24329 April 2002Appeal(s) allowed

Law Assistants and Chief Law Assistants claimed they were designated as Presenting Officers under Section 19(2) of the Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987 and sought parity in pay with Junior Administrative Grade Presenting Officers (Group B). The Central Administrative Tribunal held that they were authorised to act as P

DINESH KUMAR KASHYAP & ORS. ETC.versusSOUTH EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY & ORS. ETC.

2018 INSC 110327 November 2018Leave Granted & Disposed off

The South East Central Railway advertised 5,798 Group‑D posts in 2010 and, per a 2008 Railway Board instruction, prepared a select list with a 20% extra replacement panel. The appellants were on this extra panel, but the Railway did not appoint any of them despite 624 vacancies remaining. The appellants sought mandamus

GOVERNMENT OF A.P. AND ANR.versusY. SURENDER REDDY

2006 INSC 36525 May 2006Disposed off

Y. Surender Reddy, an APSRTC employee, sought appointment as Assistant Motor Vehicle Inspector through an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985. The Tribunal dismissed the application, deeming him a corporation employee, and the High Court later directed the Surplus Manpower Cell to cons

THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER & OTHERSversusS. LALITHA & OTHERS

2025 INSC 56524 April 2025Disposed off

S. Lalitha, a Doordarshan employee, received second and third financial upgradations under the Modified Assured Career Progression (MACP) Scheme in 2010 and 2015. In 2016 she filed a representation seeking the second upgradation under the earlier Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) as of 2009 and the third upgradat

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusBRAJ NANDAN SINGH

2005 INSC 50919 October 2005Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, a temporary sorter with the Railway Mail Service, resigned in 1977 to contest elections and his resignation was accepted. After more than two decades he applied for a pension, which was denied on the ground that Rule 26(1) of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules forfeits past service on resignatio

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ORS.versusARVIND KUMAR SRIVASTAVA & ORS.

2014 INSC 73517 October 2014Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether employees whose appointment orders were cancelled in 1987 could claim the benefit of a later judgment that restored similar employees to service. The respondents waited nine years before filing a claim, arguing that they were similarly situated to those who had earlier obtained relief

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusK.G.SONI

2006 INSC 51217 August 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent K.G. Soni, a store attendant in the Bank Note Press, was charged with misconduct for not disclosing his first wife's name on an attestation form and for marrying a second woman while his first marriage subsisted. A departmental inquiry under the Central Civil Services (Clarification, Control and Appeal)

STATE OF WEST BENGAL & ORS.versusSAMAR KUMAR SARKAR

2009 INSC 90514 July 2009Appeal(s) allowed

Samar Kumar Sarkar filed an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 before the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal seeking appointment and related benefits. After repeated adjournments, he approached the Calcutta High Court with writ petitions under Articles 226 and 227, alleging the Tribu

UNION OF INDIA & ORS.versusGOPAL MEENA & ORS.

2022 INSC 80810 August 2022Appeal(s) allowed

The Union of India appealed against orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal and the High Courts that had directed a separate zone of consideration for promotion of Scheduled Tribe candidates to the post of Superintendent in the Customs and Central Excise Commissionerate. The applicants argued that a special drive

SH. HUKAM CHAND KHUNDIAversusCHANDIGARH ADMINISTRATION AND ANR.

1995 INSC 6079 October 1995Dismissed

Hukam Chand Khundia was appointed as a temporary clerk on probation in the District and Sessions Court, Chandigarh. His services were deemed unsatisfactory and his integrity questioned, leading to a termination order without any enquiry. He challenged the order before the Central Administrative Tribunal under Section 1

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSHRI DULAL DUTI

1993 INSC 475 February 1993Appeal(s) allowed

Shri Dulal Duti, a senior officer of the Indian Railway Stores Service, was served a compulsory retirement order dated 24 April 1990 after facing major penalty charge‑sheets. He challenged the order before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, seeking its q

A.P. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSIONversusK. SUDHARSHAN REDDY AND ORS.

2006 INSC 3894 July 2006Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined whether the 5% weightage marks granted to Telugu‑medium candidates in Andhra Pradesh recruitment could be used for determining their seniority. Earlier judgments had held the weightage unconstitutional but protected the appointments already made. The respondents argued that the protection did

STATE OF WEST BENGALversusASHISH KUMAR ROY AND ORS.

2004 INSC 6933 December 2004Appeal(s) allowed

The West Bengal Bar Association challenged the West Bengal Land Reforms and Tenancy Tribunal Act, 1997, alleging that its provisions were ultra vires the Constitution because they ousted the High Court's jurisdiction under Articles 226 and 227. The Calcutta High Court struck down sections 6, 7 and 8 of the Act, holding

UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.versusSMT. DRAUPADI BEHARA AND ANR.

2005 INSC 33 January 2005Disposed off

The widow of a deceased government employee and her son applied for a compassionate appointment under the Department of Posts scheme. The authorities rejected the application after an enquiry found the family living together, despite a certificate from a Member of Parliament stating the employee lived separately. The O

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search