Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. The applicant in this O.A was transferred from the post of GDS MD, Puthukulangara to the post of GDS BPM, Paruthikuzhi, on request. His pay at Puthukulangara was at Rs. 4820 plus DA. But as GDS BPB, Paruthikuzhi, it was fixed at Rs. 3660/- plus DA. As his representation for grant of protection of pay did not yield any result, this O.A has been filed for the following reliefs: (i) Direct the respondents to grant protection of pay consequent on the applicant's posting as GDS BPM, Paruthikuzhi; (ii)Direct the respondents to consider and pass appropriate order on Annexure A-3 in the light of Annexures A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7 and A-8 judgements. (iii)Direct the respondents to extend the benefits at Annexures A-4, A-5, A-6, A-7 and A-8 to the applicant also; (iv)Any other further relief or order as this Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice ; (v)Award the costs of these proceedings to the applicant. 2. The applicant contended t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. The applicant in this O.A. entered State Service on 07.12.1978 and was inducted in the Indian Administrative Service with effect from 31.05.1988. She was granted ex-India study leave from 11.08.1998 to 20.06.1999 for pursuing Fellowship under the Humphrey Programme in the USA. She was granted study leave from 21.06.1999 to 20.06.2000 for pursuing MS in Public Policy at Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey as per rules with the recommendation of the State Government and approval by the Central Government. She resumed duty on 18.01.2000 and the unavailed portion of study leave from 18.01.2000 to 20.06.2000 was cancelled. She was further granted ex-India study leave from 15.08.2001 to 05.03.2002 and the kind of leave due and admissible from 06.03.2002 to 14.08.2002 as per rules. The State Government granted her extra ordinary leave for 4 years from 15.08.2002 to 14.08.2006 for undertaking higher studies in the USA without the approval of t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. Being identical in facts and issues, these Original Applications were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. The Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangathan had invited applications for recruitment to the post of Trained Graduate Teachers, Primary Teachers and Miscellaneous Teaching posts for the year 2011-12. The applicant in OA No. 212 of 2012 had applied for the post of Trained Graduate Teacher and the applicants in OAs Nos. 232, 283 and 484 of 2012 had applied for the post of Primary School Teachers. Advertisement No. 2 notified by the respondents had prescribed the selection method as one consisting of the preliminary examination, main examination and interview. The applicants were short listed on the basis of merit in the preliminary examination. While so, the 2nd respondent issued notice to the short listed candidates to pass Central Teachers Eligibility Test (CTET in short) to be conducted on 26.11.2011. By another notice the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. Aggrieved by the adverse entries in his Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for the year ending 31.03.2009, the applicant, a Passenger Guard at Quilon Railway Station of Southern Railway, Trivandrum Division, has filed this O.A for the following reliefs : (i) Call for the records leading to Annexures A-1 and A-2 and quash the same; (ii)Direct the respondent to ignore the adverse entries for the year ending 31.03.2009 recorded in Annexure A-1 and to consider the applicant for all future promotions on that basis; (iii)Award costs of and incidental to this application; (iv)Pass such other orders or directions as deemed just, fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Annexure A-1 is a copy of the APAR for the year ending 31.03.2009, with a forwarding letter dated 20.01.2010 calling for his representation, if any, and Annexure A-2 dated 03.01.2011 is the order rejecting his appeal against the adverse remarks. 3. The ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. The applicant is a Gramin Dak Sevak Branch Postmaster (GDSBPM) who participated in the departmental examination for recruitment to the cadre of Postman/Mail Guard for filling up 5 vacancies for the year 2010 held on 9.08.2010. The 5th respondent with 142 marks out of 150 was selected to the 2nd vacancy under the OBC quota. On examining the answer sheets of the selected candidates obtained under RTI Act, 2005, it is found that they were given 4.5 marks each for question Nos. 3 and 7 and for the self-same answer written by the applicant, he was not awarded any marks. His request for revaluation of answer paper A(i) of Postman Examination held on 29.08.2010 was rejected on the ground that there is no provision for revaluation of answer papers in the departmental examination. Aggrieved, the applicant has filed this O.A for the following reliefs: (i) To call for the records leading to Annexure A-7 and to set aside the same; (ii)To call for the reco...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Mrs. K. Noorjehan, Administrative Member 1. The relief sought by the applicant in this O.A is to declare that he is entitled for gratuity for the casual labour service with interest for the period of casual labour service rendered by him upto the date preceding the date of his absorption under the Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972. 2. Brief facts of the case as stated by the applicant are that he retired from the Railway service as Sr.Gate Keeper on 28.2.2010. According to him he had rendered casual service for the period from 6.6.1966 to 20.4.1979. He was granted temporary status from 23.7.1978 and regularised as Gangman on 21.4.1979. He retired as Sr.Gate Keeper in the Pay Band 5200-20200 + Grade Pay Rs.2400 and granted the pensionary benefits vide PPO No.0604207815. To support his contention he produced copy of Casual Labour Service Card and copy of PPO. It is submitted that he is a member of Railway Pensioners Association and came to know about the issuance of Annx.A7 by which he was e...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
MRS. K. Noorjehan, Administration Member 1. The applicant is aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not granting him HRA on the ground that the post attached quarter is bound to be occupied. 2. Brief facts as stated by the applicant are that while functioning as Sub Post Master at Kokkanissri, he was transferred and posted to officiate as Post Master Cherukunnu Mukhya Dak Ghar (MDG) by Annx.A1 order issued by the Superintendent of Post Offices, Kannur Division. It is stated that the Post Master, Cherukunnu MDG is a norm based post identified for the officials under Lower Selection Grade (LSG). For rotational transfer in the year 2011 the applicant preferred his choice places as Payyanur, Karivellur and Mandur whereas he was posted at Cherukunnu MDG. Since the applicant is a resident of Karivellur which is about 50 Kms away from his present posting he preferred an appeal to the Post Master General, Northern Region, Kozhikode on 2.5.2011. There were no response. Therefore he was c...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. The applicant's seniority is maintained in the cadre of Technician (Train Lighting) on 02.12.2005. But right from the beginning (1984) he had been working as Carpenter, which was an ex-cadre post. The respondents were directed to grant protection of pay last drawn by him in Carpenter Grade-I while placing him as Technician Grade-I in the Electrical Wing, vide order dated 12.09.2007 in O.A. No. 121/2006. He was charge sheeted for declining to accept the relieving order and for remaining absent from duty from 22.02.2007 onwards. O.A. No. 718/2008 filed by the applicant was disposed of by this Tribunal as under: "3. Without going into the merits of the case, learned counsel for applicant has submitted that since the applicant is retiring on 31.05.2010, he is prepared to report for duty to Senior Section Engineer (TL/TVC) provided the enquiry is completed within a reasonable period. 4. In view of the above position, we direct the Respondents to al...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member 1. Most of the staff of the Audit and Accounts Wing of the Office of the Deputy Accountant General (AandE), Kerala, Thrissur Branch, could not enter the office due to a blockade organized by the DYFI workers from morning to evening on 26.03.2010. The respondent authority issued orders rejecting the applicants' request for grant of special casual leave, while considering favourably the case of 95 others. The applicants were asked to submit earned leave application for 26.03.2010. As they did not do so, their absence from duty on 26.03.2010 was ordered to be treated as dies-non resulting in recovery as overpayment as well as denial of service benefits including pension. Aggrieved, the applicants have filed this O.A. challenging Annexures A-1, A-2, A-3 series and A-10 series and sought following reliefs: "(i) Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexures A1 to A3 series and A10 series to the extent they relate to the applicants and quash th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. GEORGE JOSEPH, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER: 1. A total number of 45 vacancies were notified for the examination for the post of Postal Assistant under the Calicut Division reserving, inter alia, 5 vacancies for Ex-servicemen for the year 2010. Out of 5 candidates selected in the Ex-servicemen category, Shri P Gopalakrishnan was not appointed as Postal Assistant as the verification of his Secondary School Certificate was not over by October, 2011. He had submitted his unwillingness to join the post of Postal Assistant as per his letter dated 15.10.2011. The applicant who was No.1 in the waiting list was not appointed against the vacancy thus arose. Aggrieved, he has filed this O.A for the following reliefs: (i) To declare paragraph 14 of Annexure A-6 notification as unconstitutional, ultra vires, unreasonable, arbitrary and hence void and inoperative; (ii)To call for the records leading to Annexure A-6 notification and quash paragraph 14 of Annexure A-6 notification; (iii)To declare that t...
Tag this Judgment!