C.B. Ajithkumar Vs. Union of India Represented by the General Manager and Others

C.B. Ajithkumar vs Union of India Represented by the General Manager and Others

Type Court Judgment Court Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam Decided Jan 01, 2014

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1150446

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1150446
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Judge: The Honourable Mr. a.K. Basheer, Judicial Member
Decided On: Jan 01, 2014
Case Number: O.A.No.944 of 2012
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

C.B. Ajithkumar

Respondent

Union of India Represented by the General Manager and Others

Excerpt

.....of the same.'' 2. in the written statement the respondents have stoutly defended their action and contended that the claim made by the applicant is not tenable. however, applicant has produced annexures a6, a7 and a8 office memoranda along with his rejoinder, which, according to him will show that the contentions raised by the respondents are not sustainable. learned counsel submits that the applicant will be entitled to get the reliefs sought for if only the respondents take a fresh decision in the matter in the light of annexures a6 to a-8 orders. she prays that the original application may be disposed of with such a direction to the respondents. 3. learned counsel for respondents submits that the competent authority is not averse to take a re-look at the matter in the light of annexures a6 to a8 orders. 4. in the above facts and circumstances the original application is disposed of with a direction to respondent no.3 to reconsider its decision in annexure a-2 in the light of annexures a6 to a8 office memoranda. this shall be done as expeditiously as possible at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. needless to mention that respondent no.3 shall afford sufficient opportunity of hearing to the applicant before any final decision is taken, if he so desires. 5. original application is disposed of in the above terms. no costs.

Full Judgment

A.K. Basheer, Judicial Member.

1. The applicant is a retired employee of East Coast Railway. He tendered Technical Resignation from the above Establishment while working as Loco Pilot Goods-II in the Waltair Division. He has filed this Original Application seeking the following reliefs:

"(i) Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexure A-2 and quash the same to the extent it fails to fix the applicant's pension/family pension adding 55% of the applicant's basic pay as pay element; for the purpose of calculating/emoluments/average emoluments and direct the respondents to fix and grant the applicant's pension and gratuity adding 55% of the pay element as stated in Rule 49 of the Pension Rules, 1993;

(ii). Direct the respondents to grant and pay interest @ 9% per annum on the arrears of pension and retirement gratuity to be calculated at least with effect from 1.7.2011 upto the date of full and final settlement of the same.''

2. In the written statement the respondents have stoutly defended their action and contended that the claim made by the applicant is not tenable. However, applicant has produced Annexures A6, A7 and A8 Office Memoranda along with his rejoinder, which, according to him will show that the contentions raised by the respondents are not sustainable. Learned counsel submits that the applicant will be entitled to get the reliefs sought for if only the respondents take a fresh decision in the matter in the light of Annexures A6 to A-8 orders. She prays that the Original Application may be disposed of with such a direction to the respondents.

3. Learned counsel for respondents submits that the competent authority is not averse to take a re-look at the matter in the light of Annexures A6 to A8 orders.

4. In the above facts and circumstances the Original Application is disposed of with a direction to respondent No.3 to reconsider its decision in Annexure A-2 in the light of Annexures A6 to A8 Office Memoranda. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Needless to mention that respondent No.3 shall afford sufficient opportunity of hearing to the applicant before any final decision is taken, if he so desires.

5. Original application is disposed of in the above terms. No costs.

Same Court & Year Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam · 2014 Same Parties C.B. Ajithkumar vs Union of India Represented by the General ... Same Subject Education Same Judge The Honourable Mr. a.K. Basheer, Judicial Member