Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Lucknow Court February 2001 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Ram Kali Mishra and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Decided on: Feb-21-2001
1. By this O.A. the applicant has challenged the order of removal dated 23rd August, 1990 (Annexure-1 to the O.A).2. A preliminary objection raised on behalf of the respondents is that the O.A is not maintainable before this Tribunal, the applicant being a member of General Reserve Engineering Force (in short G.R.E.F.), is a Member of Armed Forces of India. Reliance has been placed on the decision of the apex Court in the case of R. Viswan v. Union of India and Ors.. AIR 3. During the pendency of the O.A. the applicant R.C. Mishra expired, hence his legal representatives have been impleaded. The legal representatives would be entitled to certain benefits in case the order of removal is quashed by this Tribunal, The word applicant hereinafter refers to the deceased employee.4. The submission of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that the applicant was not a member of Armed Forces. The submission is that the applicant was only a civilian employee and was governed by Central Civil ...
Jamna Lal Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Decided on: Feb-08-2001
1. The applicant is an I.P.S. officer of 1963 batch, U.P. Cadre. The applicant was confirmed on 11.11.63, given Senior scale on 12.4.67 and selection grade on 1.1.77. The applicant was promoted as D.I.G. on 24.5.83 and as I.G. on 5.10.89. During all this period, as claimed, the applicant was never superseded.2.The I.P.S. Officers of U.P. Cadre belonging to 1961 hatch were considered for their promotion to Additional Director General (in short A.D.G.) of Police in January, 1992. The applicant was also considered alongwith other officers of his batch. The D.P.C. recommended 5 names including that of the applicant. Three officers senior to the applicant were promoted. A second D.P.C. was held in the same year i.e. 1992 but the applicant was not considered as the applicant's Annual Remarks was not available whereas the two other officers of 1963 batch namely C.K.Malik and S.R. Arun were considered. S.R. Arun is just above the applicant in the list of 1963 batch officers. On 29.1.94, a D.P...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›