Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Madras Court February 2012 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.
P. Harikrishnan and Others Vs. Union of India Rep by Its Secretary and ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
R. SATAPATHY, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER 1. The three applications have been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Acts, 1985 seeking similar relief and hence these applications were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The facts are that the applicants on being sponsored by the Employment Exchange have been appointed as Mazdoors in the office of the third respondent.. They are working in the said post on 8 hours per day duty from the year 1982/1983 onwards. At the time of their appointment, they were given assurance that they will be regularized once the ban on recruitment is lifted. As per the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in its Judgment, a Scheme was introduced by the respondents by letter No.45/95/87/SPB-I dated 12.4.1991. Under the said Scheme, all those casual labourers who worked for a 8 hours a day for 240 days in a Calendar year as on 29.11.1989 were conferred with Temporary Status Casual Labourers and such of those Temporary ...
B. Rajasekaran Vs. Uoi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-29-2012
B. Venkateswara Rao, Judicial Member 1. The applicant in this OA has come before the Tribunal seeking the following reliefs:- 1.) To call for the records of the 3rd respondent pertaining to his order which is made in Memo No:B/338 dated 22/04/2009. which has been confirmed by the 2nd respondent vide his Memo No.STC/3-20/09 dated 3.14.10.2009 and by the 1st respondent by an order which is made in Memo No.VIG/11-7/10 dated 31/8/2010 and set aside the same: consequent to 2.) direct the Respondents to refund the amount deducted from the pay and allowance of the applicant byway of reduction by one stage from Rs.12,720/- to Rs.12,220/- in the pay band of Rs.9300-34800 with grade pay Rs.4200 for a period of 2 years by an order of the 3rd respondent dated 22/04/2009; and 3.) To pass such further or other orders as the Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case” 2. The facts of the case in brief are that the applicant was initially appointed as Postal Assistant in t...
R. Mani and Another Vs. Union of India Rep. by the Chairman Central Bo ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-28-2012
Hon'ble Mrs. O.P. Sosamma, Administrative Member The applicants in this O.A. are aggrieved by non-inclusion of their names in the list for promotion as Inspector, Central Excise. 2. The applicants in this O.A. are Ex-servicemen who joined the Central Excise Department as Data Entry Operators/ Lower Division Clerks under the Ex-servicemen quota. Later they were promoted to the post of Senior Tax Assistants. The next avenue of promotion for Senior Tax Assistants is the post of Inspector, Central Excise. The Senior Tax assistants with two years of regular service are entitled to be considered for promotion as per the Recruitment Rules. Though the applicants had put in the required qualifying service they were not included in the list of eligible Senior Tax Assistants for promotion as Inspector, Central excise on the ground that they are over aged. Aggrieved by this the applicants and 10 other similarly placed persons filed O.A.No.1091/2011 before this Tribunal. This O.A. was disposed of a...
K. Ashok Vardhan Shetty Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-27-2012
G. SHANTHAPPA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Orders on M.A. No.873/2011. 1. The above application has been filed by applicant requesting the Tribunal to direct the respondent No. 1 to produce the file maintained by the first respondent department with regard to the application made by the applicant to proceed on voluntary retirement vigilance case file relating to the applicant. Notices were issued to the respondents. The first and second respondents have not produced any document as sought for in the M.A. We will consider the averments made in the M.A along with O.A. Orders on OA. 2. This O.A has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs: “1. To Call for the records relating to GO Rt. No. 4059 Public (Special A) department dated 07.12.2011 issued by the first respondent illegally rejecting the notice for voluntary retirement made by the applicant under rule 16 (2) of the All India services (DCRB) Rules, 1958 by citing...
C. Ponnusamy Vs. Union of India Rep. by the Secretary and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-27-2012
(G. Shanthappa, Judicial Member.) 1. The above application has been filed under Sec,19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, being aggrieved by the charge memo dated 24.08.2009. 2. We have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties. The admitted facts from either side are that the impugned charge memo dated 24.08.2009, has been signed by one Mr.S.Ravi S.O whose name has been shown as one of the witnesses in the list of witnesses and he has also signed each page of the charge memo. One Dr.B.K.Tyagi, Deputy Director (SG) and officer in charge Centre for Research in Medical Entomology, has signed only in charge memo and not on each page of the Annexures I,II and III. Annex. IV, list witnesses was not served alongwith the charge memo. It is an admitted fact that Shri. S.Ravi Administrative Officer was appointed as inquiry officer vide order dated 24.09.2009(Annex.A.2). The applicant submitted a bias petition on 08/02/2 010 and 12/08/2010 (Annex.A/3 and Annex.A/4). During the...
A. Ravichandran Vs. Union of India Rep. by the Secretary Department of ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-27-2012
Hon'ble Mrs. O.P. Sosamma Administrative Member The applicant in this O.A. is aggrieved by the orders of the second respondent in order No.13-2/2009-Adm dated 5.12.2011 cancelling his appointment to the post of Deputy Director at Central Institute of Fisheries Nautical and Engineering Training (CIFNET) on his appointment as Chief Instructor (Marine Engineering). 2. The applicant was appointed in the second respondent's organisation as Senior Instructor (Marine Engineering) with effect from 28.11.2000. While he was working in this post, the applicant was selected to the post of Deputy Director in the same Institute with effect from 10.11.2000 on deputation basis. While working as Deputy Director, the applicant was selected for the post of Chief Instructor (Marine Engineering) on the basis of selection conducted by the Union Public Service Commission. The offer of appointment to the post of Chief Instructor (Marine Engineering) was made to the applicant by the Govt. of India Ministry of ...
G. Ponpondy Vs. the Union of India Rep. by Divisional Railway Manager ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-27-2012
Hon'ble Mr. R. Satapathy, Member (A) This OA has been filed under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act 1985. The Applicant herein G. Ponpondy worked as a casual labourer with the respondent organisation. The respondent have issued a Notification dated 25.03.2003 marked as Annexure A2 for screening of casual labourers in the Live Register. The applicants name finds place at Serial No. 1709 in the same list and he is reported to be worked for 461 days. However it is the greivance of the applicant that the respondent while considering the case of others found in the Live Register have rejected his name for regularisation on the ground that he is found overaged on the date of Notification dated 25.03.2003. Under such circumstance he has filed this OA seeking the following relief : "To direct the Respondents to consider and appoint the applicant to the post of Temporary Trackman pursuant to its notification No. U/P564/I/WP/MDU/2003, dated 25.03.2003 with due seniority and arrears" 2. ...
M. Sivapatham and Others Vs. the Union of India Repd by the Ministry o ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-24-2012
Hon'ble Mr. B.V. Venkateswara Rao, Member (J) The applicants has filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking the following relief: "to extend the benefit of the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bangalore in O.A. 373/2006 dated 13.02.2008 as confirmed by the Supreme court in SLP 22196/2009 dated 21.08.2009 as binding on the respondents and that no recovery could be made from the Administrative Officers working with the respondents during the period 01.01.1996 - 04.06.2002 based on the order of the 1st respondent dated 24.07.2006" 2. The brief facts of the case according to applicants that all are working as Administrative Officers which is a promotional post with higher responsible post. The Office Superintendent is a feeder category. The first respondent issued the instructions that the pay scale of Office Superintendent and Accounts Officer are merged into one pay scale of Rs. 6500 - 10500/- on 24.07.2006. The 1st respondent ha...
Pondicherry State Health Assistants Health Inspectors and Technical As ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-23-2012
Hon'ble Mrs.O.P. Sosamma, Administrative Member The applicants, who are Health Assistants in the Health and Family Welfare Department of Govt. of Puducherry have filed this O.A. aggrieved by the orders of the second respondent in letter No.A32018/1/DHFWS/2009/165 dated 12.10.2009 rejecting their request for drawing up the seniority list in the merged cadre of Health Assistants for implementing the orders of the first respondent in G.O.MS No.79 dated 8.11.2005. The applicants have filed an amended O.A. where the additional relief of quashing of the order of the second respondent dated 12.10.2009 in letter No.A.32018/1/E2/2009/165 and the consequential dated order 8.1.2010 in No.A32016/6/2007/E2/DHFWS/2 promoting Para Medical Workers as Non Medical Supervisors. 2.The main contention of the applicants is that the Govt. have passed orders in G.O.MS.No.79 dated 8.11.2005 re-designating 26 posts of Para Medical Workers as Health Assistants and 5 posts of Non Medical Supervisors as Health Ins...
Smt. M. Pankajam Vs. Union of India Rep. by General Manager, Govt of I ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras
Decided on: Feb-21-2012
The Hon'ble Mr. R. Satapathy, Administrative Member The applicant has come before this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Acts, 1985 for the following relief: “to call for the records pertaining to order bearing No.EFA/A/VIG/018/Pankajam dated 2.4.2010 and order bearing No.EFA/A/VIG/018 Pankajam dated 17.11.2010 of respondent and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondent to regularize the period of suspension between 11.11.2005 and 6.12.2007 and to pay the applicant the arrears of pay and allowances for the said period of suspension together with interest at 12% p.a. from the date of due till the date of payment.” 2. The facts of the case as stated by the applicant in the application are that while she was working as Labourer(SS) during the year 2005, she was placed under suspension with effect from 11.11.2005 on the alleged ground of criminal offence was under investigation by the order bearing No.EFA/A/VG098/MP dated 23.11.2005 and t...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »