M. Mohammed Sameer Vs. Union of India Represented by the Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep, Kavaratti and Another

M. Mohammed Sameer vs Union of India Represented by the Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep, Kavaratti and Anoth

Type Court Judgment Court Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam Decided Jun 24, 2009

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/938302

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/938302
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Judge: Honourable Mr. George Paracken, Judicial Member &Amp; Honourable Ms. K. Noorjehan, Administrative Member
Decided On: Jun 24, 2009
Case Number: O.A. No. 425 of 2009
Subject: Environment

Case Summary

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

Environment

Key legal issue: Environment

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

M. Mohammed Sameer

Advocate For the Applicant: Mr. V.B. Hari Narayan, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. S. Radhakrishnan, Advocate.

Respondent

Union of India Represented by the Administrator, Union Territory of Lakshadweep, Kavaratti and Anoth

Advocate Shri. S. Radhakrishnan

Excerpt

hon'ble mr. george paracken, judicial member the applicant is a native of kalpeni island and is now working as circle inspector, amini police station. according to him, ever since he has joined service in the year 2003 he was subjected to constant transfer to various places including chetlat, andrott, agatti, minicoy, kavaratti and amini. he has, therefore, made annexure a-2 representation dated 5.6.2009 to the 2nd respondent, namely, the superintendent of police, police head quarters, kavaratti, requesting for a transfer to minicoy. 2. the counsel for the applicant, shri. v.b. hari narayan, has submitted that the applicant will be satisfied if a direction is given to the aforesaid respondent to consider his said representation in accordance with the rules and dispose it of at an early date. 3. shri. s. radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the respondents, has no objection to the aforesaid submissions made by the counsel for the applicant. 4. in view of the above position, we dispose of this o.a with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the annexure a-2 representation dated 5.6.2009 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and dispose of it with a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the rules and instructions on the subject under intimation to the applicant. as far as the vacancy now available at minicoy is concerned, it shall be filled up only subject to the outcome of the decision of the 2nd respondent in the aforesaid representation. 5. with the aforesaid directions, the o.a is disposed of. there shall be no order as to costs.

Full Judgment

HON'BLE MR. GEORGE PARACKEN, JUDICIAL MEMBER

The applicant is a native of Kalpeni Island and is now working as Circle Inspector, Amini Police Station. According to him, ever since he has joined service in the year 2003 he was subjected to constant transfer to various places including Chetlat, andrott, Agatti, Minicoy, Kavaratti and Amini. He has, therefore, made Annexure A-2 representation dated 5.6.2009 to the 2nd respondent, namely, the Superintendent of Police, Police Head Quarters, Kavaratti, requesting for a transfer to Minicoy.

2. The counsel for the applicant, Shri. V.B. Hari Narayan, has submitted that the applicant will be satisfied if a direction is given to the aforesaid respondent to consider his said representation in accordance with the rules and dispose it of at an early date.

3. Shri. S. Radhakrishnan, learned counsel for the respondents, has no objection to the aforesaid submissions made by the counsel for the applicant.

4. In view of the above position, we dispose of this O.A with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the Annexure A-2 representation dated 5.6.2009 within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order and dispose of it with a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the rules and instructions on the subject under intimation to the applicant. As far as the vacancy now available at Minicoy is concerned, it shall be filled up only subject to the outcome of the decision of the 2nd respondent in the aforesaid representation.

5. With the aforesaid directions, the O.A is disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.

Same Court & Year Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam · 2009 Same Parties M. Mohammed Sameer vs Union of India Represented by the Admin... Same Subject Environment Same Judge Honourable Mr. George Paracken, Judicial Member &Amp; Honoura...