Ajeet Kumar shukla vs Director General Resettlement (DGR)

1

(Open Court)

Central Administrative Tribunal

Allahabad Bench, Allahabad



Original Application No.1027 of 2026

th
This the 14 Day of October, 2026.
HON’BLE MR. RAJNISH KUMAR RAI, MEMBER-J.
HON’BLE MS. MANJU PANDEY, MEMBER-A.
Army No. 15621874L Rank LNk, Ajeet Kumar Shukla son of Shri Uttam
Shukla, Resident of village Khokhiya Mubarakpur, Post-Bankata,
Bharpurawa, District- Kushinagar.
….Applicant .
By Advocate: Mr. Pankaj Kumar Ojha/Mr. Harish Kumar Tripathi.
Versus
1. Union of India Ministry of defence through its Secretary New
Delhi.
2. Director General Resettlement West Block IV R.K. Puram, New
Delhi-110066.
3. Zila Sainik Board Kushinagar through its Secretary.
4. Director National Sugar Institute (NSI) Kalyanpur, Kanpur, Uttar

Pradesh.

… Respondents
By Advocate: Mr. Chakrapani Vatsyayan.
ORDER
By Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (Judicial)
Mr. Pankaj Kumar Ojha, learned counsel for the applicant
and Mr. Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the
respondents are present and heard.

2. The instant original application has been filed seeking
following reliefs: -
Shakuntala Singh

2

“A. To issue an order or direction, directing the
respondent authorities to consider the candidature of
the applicant for the post of the library and
information assistant (group ‘B’ non gazetted) under
the ministry of consumer affairs, applied as per the
terms of vacancy notification as well as guideline for
RSBs/ZSBs for providing the employment assistance
within stipulated period.

B. To issue an order or direction, directing the
respondent authorities to consider the selection and
appointment of the applicant for the post of the library
and information assistant (group ‘B’ non gazetted)
under the ministry of consumer affairs, applied as per
the terms of vacancy notification as well as guideline
for RSBs/ZSBs for providing the employment
assistance within stipulated period, otherwise it will
irreparable loss and injury to the applicant.

C. To an order or direction in the appropriate
nature, which this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit and
proper in the attending circumstances of the case.

D. Award cost of the application in the favour of
the applicant.

E. Issue an order or direction to quash the
intimation order dated 21.08.2026 send by the
respondent No.2/ Director General Resettlement West
Block IV R.K. Puram, New Delhi-110066, by which
application of the applicant has not been forward by
the District Saini Board Kushinagar to DGR as per
format promulgated, applied by the applicant on the
post library and information assistant (Group B) non
gazetted.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, an ex-
serviceman serving as a Lance Naik in the Indian Army, has
filed the present Original Application seeking consideration of
his candidature for the post of Library and Information Assistant
(Group ‘B’, Non-Gazetted) at the National Sugar Institute (NSI),
Kanpur, and quashing of the intimation order dated 21.08.2026
issued by respondent No. 2, the Directorate General of
Resettlement (DGR), regarding non-forwarding of the
applicant’s application by the Zila Sainik Board, Kushinagar, in
the prescribed format. The applicant applied for the aforesaid
post through the Zila Sainik Board, Kushinagar, on 12.06.2026;
however, his application was not forwarded to the DGR in the
prescribed Excel format, resulting in non-consideration of his
Shakuntala Singh

3

candidature. Despite subsequent correspondence and an RTI
application, the matter remains unresolved.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that, despite
having applied for the aforesaid post within the prescribed
time, the applicant’s candidature has not been considered
because his application was not forwarded by the Zila Sainik
Board, Kushinagar, to the DGR in the prescribed format. He
further submitted that the intimation order dated 21.08.2026
issued by respondent No. 2 reflects the non-receipt of the
applicant’s details from the Zila Sainik Board, Kushinagar. He,
therefore, sought appropriate directions for redressal of the
applicant’s grievance in accordance with the applicable
guidelines.
5. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicant sought
liberty to submit a fresh representation before the competent
authority regarding non-forwarding of his application to the
DGR in the prescribed Excel format and for consideration of his
candidature in accordance with the applicable guidelines.
6. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents submitted
that they have no objection to the competent authority being
directed to consider and decide the applicant’s representation
in accordance with law.
7. Considering the submissions made by learned counsel for
the parties and the nature of the grievance raised, we deem it
appropriate to dispose of the present Original Application at
this stage, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the
applicant’s claim. Accordingly, the applicant is directed to
submit a fresh representation before respondent Nos. 2 and 3
within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of
this order, raising his grievance regarding non-forwarding of
Shakuntala Singh

4

his application to the DGR in the prescribed Excel format. Upon
receipt of such representation, respondent Nos. 2 and 3/the
competent authority are directed to consider and decide the
same in accordance with the applicable guidelines by passing a
reasoned and speaking order within three months from the date
of receipt of the representation.
8. It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any
opinion on the merits of the applicant’s claim.
9. With the aforesaid observations and directions, this
Original Application stands disposed of. No order as to costs.
10. All pending Miscellaneous Applications, if any, stand
disposed of.

( Manju Pandey ) ( Rajnish Kumar Rai )
Member (A) Member (J)



/Shakuntala/


Shakuntala Singh