Tribunal Directs Consideration of Representation Regarding AIIMS Departmental Integration and Seniority Per Delhi High Court Precedent

The applicant, a 62-year-old doctor at AIIMS, New Delhi, filed an Original Application (O.A.) before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) challenging the "Guidelines for Functioning of Centres, Formation of Divisions and Units at AIIMS" dated 28.01.2020.

The applicant sought to be treated as an integral part of the parent Department of Radiodiagnosis for seniority, headship, and other service benefits.

He relied on a previous Tribunal order (O.A. No. 738/2026) and a specific Delhi High Court judgment to request that his pending representation dated 09.04.2026 be decided by the competent authority.

1. Whether the respondents should be directed to decide the applicant's representation regarding his departmental status and seniority in light of established judicial precedents.

The court's directions were anchored in the principle of administrative responsiveness and judicial consistency.

Specifically, the Tribunal referred to the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in W.P.(C) No. 7718/2022 Dr. Dilip R. Shende (09.08.2024), which addressed the administrative structure and seniority within AIIMS.

The court also followed its own precedent from O.A. No. 738/2026 (26.02.2026), where it granted similar relief by directing the disposal of representations through "innocuous directions".

The Tribunal did not adjudicate the case on its merits but focused on the procedural right of the applicant to have his grievance addressed by the executive.

By noting that the applicant sought relief similar to a previously decided matter (O.A. No. 738/2026), the Tribunal applied the law of parity in administrative directions.

The court emphasized that the competent authority (Respondents 1 to 5) must evaluate the applicant's claims against the specific legal backdrop of the Dr. Dilip R. Shende judgment.

To ensure fairness to all parties, the Tribunal expressly kept all legal contentions—including the issue of limitation—open for the administrative authority to decide via a reasoned and speaking order.

The court ordered that this decision be made through a "reasoned and speaking order" within six weeks of receipt of the order, specifically taking into account the Delhi High Court's decision in W.P.(C) No. 7718/2022. No opinion on the merits was expressed, and no order as to costs was made.