CAT - ['Delhi']

Direction to Competent Authority to Decide Pending Representation for Higher Pay Scale Elevation

Rajeev Chaudhary vs HEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

CAT - ['Delhi']JUDGMENT: April 29, 20262 MIN READSOURCE JUDGMENT
THE ORIGINAL LAWLENS SUMMARY
01

Facts

The applicant, Rajeev Chaudhary, was appointed as a Registrar at AIIMS-Rishikesh in Pay Level-12 (Pay Band-3).

Source reference: p. 2

He claimed entitlement to elevation to Level-13 (Pay Band-4) effective from 24.04.2023, following the completion of five years of service in Level-12.

Source reference: p. 2

His claim was based on a Government Order dated 02.11.2017 issued by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD), which stipulates that Deputy Registrars or equivalents shall be placed in Level-13 after five years of service.

Source reference: p. 2-3

Despite submitting multiple representations (dated 09.09.2024, 07.10.2024, and 23.04.2025) and subsequent forwarding of his case by AIIMS-Rishikesh to the Ministry, no final decision was taken.

Source reference: p. 3-4

The applicant approached the Tribunal seeking a direction for the respondents to grant the higher pay scale.

Source reference: p. 2
02

Issues

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to the Pay Level-13 scale based on the MHRD communication dated 02.11.2017 after completing five years in Level-12.

Source reference: p. 3

2. Whether a direction can be issued to the respondents to decide the applicant's pending representations in a time-bound manner.

Source reference: p. 4
03

Law Applied

Department of Higher Education, MHRD Letter dated 02.11.2017, specifically paragraph 2, which provides that after completion of 5 years of service, officers in the rank of Deputy Registrar or equivalent shall be placed at Level-13 with a Rationalised Entry Pay of Rs. 1,18,500/- as per the 7th CPC.

Source reference: p. 2-3

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

Source reference: p. 2
04

Reasoning

The Tribunal noted the applicant’s reliance on the MHRD guidelines and the fact that AIIMS-Rishikesh had already initiated correspondence with the Ministry regarding the applicant's eligibility.

Source reference: p. 3-4

At the admission stage, the applicant limited his prayer to seeking a direction for the disposal of his pending representations.

Source reference: p. 4

The respondents (Union of India and AIIMS) expressed no objection to such a direction.

Source reference: p. 4

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that a "reasoned and speaking order" was necessary to resolve the administrative delay without delving into the substantive merits of the applicant's entitlement to Level-13 at this stage.

Source reference: p. 5
05

Holding

The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application at the admission stage without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case.

It directed the respondents to consider the applicant’s pending representations dated 09.09.2024, 07.10.2024, and 23.04.2025 and pass a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks from the receipt of the certified order.

Source reference: p. 5

Pending MAs were also disposed of with no order as to costs.

Source reference: p. 5
CAT - ['Delhi']

Original Court PDF

Rajeev ChaudharyvsHEALTH AND FAMILY WELFARE

CAT - ['Delhi'] · April 29, 2026

Click to open original judgment

Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in

Click to open original judgment