Xavier Antony, Alappuzha District and Others Vs. Union of India Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Defence, New Delhi and Others - Semantic Analysis by spaCy

Decided on: Dec-10-2009

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam

LAW: Section 14 of the A. Ts Act, Indian Canteen Code, the Factories Act, the Provident Funds Act, Section 14(1)(a, the Administrative Tribunals Act, Article 136 of the Constitution, the A.T. Act

ORG: JUDICIAL, Tribunal, the Southern Naval Command, Pay Commission Recommendations, Central Government Servants, Southern Naval Command, Regimental, Annexure R-1, State Courts, Civil, the Union Government, Defence, the Defence Services, Non Public Fund, the Central Government, Tribunal, Non Public Fund, Tribunal, OA No, Tribunal, the High Court, Annexure R-4, Tribunal, the Apex Court, Union of India, Tribunal, Tribunal, Non public Fund, Tribunal, Union of India, the Apex Court, Canteen Stores Department, The Canteen Stores Department, Head Office, Base Depot, The Canteen Stores Department, the Ministry of Defence, Canteens, Commanding Officers, navy, the Canteen Stores Department, the Canteen Services, Canteen Stores Department, Canteen Stores Department, Quarter Master General, navy, Government, General Thimmaya, the Canteen Stores Department, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Defence, the Canteen Stores Department, Canteens, Canteens, the Consolidated Fund of India, the Canteen Stores Department, the Ministry of Defence, Emphasis, Life Insurance Corporation, Corporation, Court, Court, Government, the Canteen Stores Department, the Canteen Stores Department, the Ministry of Defence, the Consolidated Fund of India, Canteen Stores Department, Canteens, Canteen Stores Department, the Ministry of Defence, a Committee of Subordinate Legislation, Canteens, Committee, the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Administrative Tribunal Act, the Union of India, the Central Administrative Tribunal, C.S.D., Ministry of Defence, the Apex Court, Union of India vs Chotelal, the Apex Court, the Union of India, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bombay Bench, NDA, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Tribunal, the "Regimental Fund, the Consolidated Fund of India, Regimental Funds, Tribunal, Tribunal, NDA, the National Defence Academy, Tribunal, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Dhobis, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Tribunal, the Consolidated Fund of India, the Regimental Fund, Tribunal, the Regimental Fund, the Consolidated Fund, the Ministry of Defence of the Union Government, Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, Court, the Regimental Fund, the Commandant of the Academy, the "Regimental Fund, the Defence Services Regulation, the Regimental Fund, Regimental Fund, the "Regimental Fund, Funds, the Regimental Fund, the Ministry of Defence, the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Consolidated Fund of India, the Ministry of Defence.(Emphasis, the Central Administrative Tribunal, Tribunal, Tribunal, the Apex Court, the Union of India, Union of India v. Chotelal 1, NDA, the Ministry of Defence, Court, the Defence Services Regulation, Tribunal, Commanding Officer, Regimental, the High Court, Tribunal, Tribunal

ORDINAL: first

PERSON: hitherto, INS Venduruthy, Shri Joseph Raju, Aslam, M. Aslam, Canteens, K.S. Thimmaya, Chandra Raha v. LIC, Canteens, Jodhpur Branch, M. Aslam, Khadakwasla, Mahajan, Mahajan, Para 801(b, Mahajan, Goswami, INS Venduruthy, Joseph Raju, Chotelal

PRODUCT: the VI Central Pay Commission, Funds, Para 820

CARDINAL: 2, 29, 3, 4., one, 1, 720, 6, 7, 3, two, 1, 2, 33, three, 3400, two, four, 86, 8, 1, 2, 3, 801, 801, 4, 5, 801, 6, 7, 9, 802, 10, 11, 12

GPE: O.A., O.P., India, Bombay, India, India, Pakistan, India, OA, Bombay, India, OA, M. Aslam, Khadakwasla, OA, OA

LOC: Govt

DATE: 1997, 289/1997, 15225/1997, 2001, pre-independence days, 1948, 3 years, 1950, 1947, the early fifties, 1948, three years, 1950, 1977, 1039-40, 1999, 1995, 1999, nearly 30 years, 1925, 1985, more than 30 years, monthly, monthly

EVENT: this O.A. 5, the World War II, World War II

TIME: 9-1-1994