Naveen Prakash Nimesh vs STEEL AUTHORITY OF INDIA LIMITED (SAIL)

1
Item No. 11/ C-II O.A. No. 2678/2025


Central Administrative Tribunal
Principal Bench: New Delhi

O.A. No. 2678/2025

st
This the 31 day of August, 2026

Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J)
Hon’ble Dr. Anand S Khati, Member (A)

Naveen Prakash Nimesh
S/o- Prem Raj Nimesh,
R/0- Dr. Sanjeev Gambir B-59, City apartment
Vasundhara enclave New Delhi 110096

…Applicant

(By Advocate: Mr. Saqib)

Versus

1. Steel Authority of India
Through its chairman, SAIL, Corporate Office, 2nd Floor,
Ispat Bhawan, Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003.

2. Chief General Manager (HR)
Human Resource Department
SAIL, Central marketing organisation 40, jawaharlal nehru
road, Kolkata


…Respondents

(By Advocate: Mr. KK Rai, Sr. Adv.,with Mr. Digvijay Rai, Mr.
Archit Mishra, Ms. Medha Tandon, Mr. Shubham Khare,
Mr. Chinmoy Samajdar (GM (Law)), Mr. Mukesh Kumar GM
(HR), Mr. Rahul Sharma AGM (Law, Mr. Mahesh Asnani AGM
(HR))
KSHITIJ SAXENA
KSHITIJ
2026.09.03
16:17:28+05'30'
SAXENA

2
Item No. 11/ C-II O.A. No. 2678/2025


ORDER (ORAL)
Hon’ble Mr. R.N. Singh, Member (J)

By way of the present OA filed under Section 19 of the
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant has prayed for
the following relief:
“a. To quash and set aside the impugned Order No. HR/OO/99/2025
dated 11.02.2025, issued for premature retirement of the Applicant
from service;
b. To quash and set aside the impugned Order No. HR/OO/115/2025
dated 21.03.2025, whereunder the appeal of the applicant has been
summarily rejected.
C. Direct the Respondents to reinstate the Applicant in service with all
consequential service benefits, including continuity of service, back
wages, and allowances;
d. Grant any other relief, as deemed fit and proper in the interest of
justice and equity.”

2. In response to notice, the respondent No. 1 has filed a detailed
counter reply disputing the claim of the applicant. The applicant
has filed rejoinder reiterating his claim and the grounds pleaded
in support thereof.
3. The impugned order dated 11.02.2025 (Annexure A-1) reads as
under:

“Whereas, the Competent Authority is of the opinion that it is in the
public interest to prematurely retire Shri N P Nimesh, SAIL P No.
G000679, AGM (MS-WH), WH, Faridabad on account of ineffeciency,
doubtful integrity, and conduct unbecoming of an employee of SAIL
and obstructs efficiency.
Now, therefore, in exercise of the powers conferred by Rule 4.0(3) of
Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1977 and in accordance with
the laid down procedure, Competent Authorit hereby gives pay in lieu
KSHITIJ SAXENA
KSHITIJ
2026.09.03
16:17:28+05'30'
SAXENA

3
Item No. 11/ C-II O.A. No. 2678/2025


of notice period of three (3) months to Shri NP Nimesh (SAIL P No.
G000679), AGM (MS-WH), WH, Faridabad that Shri N P Nimesh,
having already attained age of 50 years, shall retire from the services
of SAIL on 11.02.2025 (afternoon).”

4. Further, the impugned order dated 21.03.2025 (Annexure A-2)
reads as under:
“Whereas, consequent upon decision of the Appointing Authority
taken in terms of Rule 4.0 (3) of the SAIL CDA Rules, 1977, Office
Order No HR/OO/99/2025 dated 11/02/2025 was issued to retire
Shri N P Nimesh prematurely w.e.f. 11/02/2025 (afternoon).
Whereas, appeal dated 25.02.2025 of Shri N P Nimesh against
premature retirement has been considered by the Competent
Authority. On finding no merit in the said appeal, the same has been
rejected by the Competent Authority.”

5. Mr. Rai, learned Senior Advocate, after arguing at length, under
instructions from respondent No. 1, through the officer(s) present
with him, submits that the respondents may be accorded liberty to
withdraw the aforesaid impugned orders, with liberty to them to
pass fresh order(s) in accordance with the relevant rules and law
on the subject. Mr. Saqib, learned counsel for the applicant, has
no objection to such request on behalf of the respondents.
6. In light of the aforesaid, with the consent of learned counsel for
the parties and without going into the merits of the case, the
present OA stands disposed of with the following directions:
i. The respondents, particularly respondent No. 1, shall
withdraw the impugned orders dated 11.02.2025 (Annexure
KSHITIJ SAXENA
KSHITIJ
2026.09.03
16:17:28+05'30'
SAXENA

4
Item No. 11/ C-II O.A. No. 2678/2025


A-1) and 21.03.2025 (Annexure A-2), positively within one
week from today, vide written order.
ii. The applicant shall be entitled to all consequential benefits
in accordance with the relevant Rules. Such consequential
benefits shall be released to the applicant positively within
six weeks of passing the order regarding withdrawal of the
aforesaid impugned orders.
iii. The respondents shall be at liberty to pass appropriate fresh
order(s) in accordance with the relevant rules and law on
the subject. If the applicant is aggrieved by such order(s), he
shall be at liberty to avail the legal remedies, of course, in
accordance with law.

7. However, in the facts and circumstances, there shall be no order
as to costs.

(Dr. Anand S Khati) (R.N. Singh)
Member (A) Member (J)





/ks /
KSHITIJ SAXENA
KSHITIJ
2026.09.03
16:17:28+05'30'
SAXENA