Tarak Nath Singh v. Union Of India And ORS.

02.07.2026 sdas WPA 14743 of 2026 Tarak Nath Singh vs.

Union of India & Ors.

Mr. Aritra Palit Mr. Shraman Sarkar Mr. Sayantan Kar ..... for the petitioner Mr. Rivu Dutta Ms. Mary Datta .....for the respondents no. 1,4 & 5 Mr. Lokenath Chatterjee Mr. Sukanta Ghosh ..... for the respondent no. 3

1. Let affidavit-of-service, as filed in Court, be kept on record.

2. The petitioner is aggrieved that his service in the respondent no. 3 has not been regularized and that he is not getting the requisite salary as it ought to have been granted.

3. The petitioner has been continuing in service on a temporary basis, which is the major bone of contention. He had approached respondent no. 5, who passed the order dated February 5, 2026, has held that the petitioner, being a worker with temporary status, is not eligible for the benefits admissible under the 7th Central Pay Commission.

4. Mr. Palit, learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, submits that similarly situated

persons, who had approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, have obtained orders directing the concerned officer of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to take a decision in the matter.

5. The petitioner prays for a similar relief as any further consideration by the respondent no. 5 on behalf of the respondent no. 3 would amount to an idle and empty formality.

6. I have been informed that the respondent no. 2 is the authority who can decide on this issue as to whether the petitioner is entitled to benefits under the 7th Central Pay Commission.

7. In view of the aforestated, I direct the respondent no. 2 or any person of the department, duly authorized by the respondent no. 2, to deliberate on the issue and pass a reasoned order by August 31, 2026. The concerned authority will decide as to whether the petitioner is entitled to the benefits under 7th Central Pay Commission, in spite of being a casual employee with the respondent no. 3, termed as an employee on temporary basis, within the aforestated timelines.

8. With the aforestated directions, the writ petition is, thus, disposed of.

9. There will be no order as to costs.

10. I make it clear that I have not gone into the merits of the matter and no adjudication has been done in so far as the rights of the petitioner is concerned.

11. Urgent photostat certified copy of the order, if applied for, be given to the parties upon usual undertakings.

(Reetobroto Kumar Mitra, J.)