Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court June 1999 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.
Mrs. Devanti Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
Decided on: Jun-30-1999
1. This O.A. has been filed by Mrs. Devanti, widow of Late Sh. Ram Parsad who worked under the respondents as a Gangman since 16th of March, 1981. He had been subjected to screening for considering him for regularisation. This screening, though held on 23.3.1991, the result of the same was, however, not declared till 7.8.1995 and he, in the meantime, died on 23rd October, 1993 i.e. approximately 2 1/2 years after conducting of screening. Consequent upon the declaration of the result on 7.8.1995, order Annexure A-2 was issued regularising Late Sh.Ram Parsad and his name, alongwith other colleagues, appeared at Sr.No. 41 of the said order. On death of her husband, applicant was given compassionate appointment.2. It is pleaded by the applicant that a very meagre sum was paid to her on account of gratuity and Provident Fund. She claims that as per Central Civil Service Rules, on death of her husband she became entitled for the grant of pensionary benefits i.e. family pension, and other ex...
Uday Vasudeo Pathre Vs. Director General, Council of
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Decided on: Jun-29-1999
1. The present O, A. is directed against the in-decision of the respondents in sanctioning the Extra Ordinary Leave (in short E.O.L.) to enable the applicant to go to IOWA State University, U.S.A. for carrying out advance study and research in sucrose metabolism.2. The applicant is posted as Scientist Grade-E-i in Stress Physiology Lab of NBRI. He was appointed initially in the year 1989 as Scientist Grade 'B'. The applicant received an offer from Prof. Parag Chitnis for carrying-out advance studies on sucrose metabolism at IOWA State University, U.S.A. He accordingly gave an application for E.O.L. for the purpose of proceeding to U.S.A. in connection with advanced study and research programme. The tentative date for proceeding to U.S.A. was 1st April '98 and the research programme was of one year duration. The letter from IOWA State University of Science and Technology dated 27.2.98 shows that the applicant was to go for advance study as a research scholar for a period of one year be...
Dharam Pal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
1. Through this single order, we are disposing of the above-mentioned two Original Applications as these involve identical questions of facts and law. It is coincident that both the petitioners are the employees of the Directorate of Census Operations, U.T., Chandigarh, posted locally, whose medical bills are under clouds for the purposes of reimbursement.2. Applicant in O. A. No. 763-CH of 1998 - Dharam Pal is an Assistant whose wife, Smt. Sudesh Kumari, is serving as a Junior Scale Stenographer in the office of the Director Health Services, U.T., Chandigarh (General Hospital, Sector 16), since September, 1987.Applicant had been claiming medical reimbursement from his own department, for himself, his wife, children and dependants, since his joining service. On recommendations of the IVth Punjab Pay Commission, the State of Punjab granted Fixed Medical Allowance ('FMA' for short) of Rs. 250/- per month to all its eligible employees on a uniform basis w.e.f. 1.1.1998 (Annexure A-1). Th...
Shri Vijay Singh Vs. Government of Nct and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jun-28-1999
1. Applicant impugns Respondents' letter dated 27.11.1990 (Ann A-6), the I.O's Report dated 5.5.91 (Ann. A-7), the Disciplinary Authority's order dated 7.4.92 (Ann. A-11) and the Appellate Authority's order dated 13.11.92 (Ann. A-13) and prays for reinstatement with consequential benefits.2. Upon a compliant dated 17.2.90 received from one Shri B.S. Chauhan, resident of 1/351 Sadar Bazar. Delhi Cantt., New Delhi-110010 that applicant received Rs. 700/- from him to show favour to him by not taking any legal action in respect of a dispute between a truck driver and him, applicant was suspended by order dated 22.2.90 (Ann. A-1) and a Preliminary Enquiry under Rule 15(1) Delhi Police (P and A) Rules was ordered on 2.3.90 (Ann. A-2).3. As the P.E. reportedly substantiated the charges against the applicant of not taking legal action by misusing his official position and accepting illegal gratification and as the evidence and materials available on the file were not sufficient to prosecute t...
G.K. Verma and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur
Decided on: Jun-25-1999
1. The background facts, the legal issues involved and the reliefs prayed for in these three Original Applications are identical and hence they are being disposed of by a common order. The issues involved relate to stepping up of the pay of the seniors to the level of pay of the juniors.2. The legal issues that fall for determination in these applications are as hereunder- (i) whether a senior can claim stepping up of pay with reference to the pay of his juniors, when they work in two different units. (ii) what are the circumstances under which stepping up can be allowed and what is the basis on which stepping up can be claimed Before we examine the issues involved, it would be apposite to mention, in brief, the background facts of these three applications only to appreciate the legal issues.These two applications have been filed by officials working under the respondent- Railways in the Jabalpur Division, Central Railway. All the applicants in these two OAs are working on the post of...
Neerugati Narayana Vs. Post Master General and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
1. An order passed by Respondent No. 2 appointing Respondent No. 4 as EDBPM at Melumdoddi is sought to be declared as illegal and void in this O.A. A further direction is also sought to be given to the Respondents that the applicant be appointed as EDBPM, Melumdoddi BO, Punganoor So, Chittor District with all consequential benefits.2. Respondent No. 2 issued a notification for appointment of an incumbent for the post in question. The applicant applied for the same.His papers were examined and verified by the Sub-Divisional Inspector (Postal) of Madanapalli East Sub-Division on 27,1.1998 at 11.00 am at Melumdoddi Post Office. Eventually Respondent No. 4 was appointed. His appointment is challenged by the applicant on the grounds, that the applicant had studied up to B.A. Degree whereas Respondent No. 4 had only passed S.S.C. and obtained 213 marks, Another candidate for the post T. Reddappa had passed S.S.C. and obtained 212 marks. The applicant had passed SSC in second division and se...
N. Somisetty Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
1. Heard Mr. R. Briz Mohan Singh, learned Counsel for the applicant and Mr. G. Parameshwar Rao, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents.2. The applicant is questioning the action of the respondent No.3 in rejecting his request for grant of pro-rate pensionary benefits in accordance with the Department of Personnel O.M.No. 28016/4/76-Ests(C) dated 25.3.1977.3. The applicant was initially appointed as Upper Division Clerk (UDC) on the Office of the Accountant General, Madras. He was later shifted to the Office of the Accountant General of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad.His services were confirmed in the same post on 25.11.1964. He was also given the selection grade promotion. Thereafter, he was sent on deputation to the Office of the Regional Research Laboratories, Hyderabad ("RRL" for short). While on deputation, he applied for the post of Assistant Administrative Officer in the National Seeds Corporation Ltd., New Delhi ("Corporation" for short). It was a Public Sector Undertaking ("P...
D.M. Subrahmanyam and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
1. There are two applicants of this OA. In an earlier OA. No. 795 of 1993, by an order passed on 5.11.1996 this Tribunal directed the respondents to consider the application of these two applicants for seniority from the date of regularisation of their services in the light of Government of India, Ministry of Defence's Circulars dated 14-7-1992 and 15-3-1994. However, the 4th respondent (Commander of Works (Projects), Visakhapatnam), held that the applicants were not eligible for seniority from 23-8-1975 and 1 -10-1972 respectively as claimed by them on the ground that the panel of candidates for the purpose of promotion was not applicable in the case of the applicants.By a letter dated 14-7-1992, the Government of India, Ministry of Defence issued instructions that the service conditions of the Task Force personnel engaged by C.W.E. (P), Portblair, Andamans were not applicable to the personnel employed in C.W.E. (P), D.D., Visakhapatnam which, according to the applicants, was not cor...
K. Rammohan and ors. Vs. the Director General,
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Jun-21-1999
1. There are three applicants in this O.A. They are aggrieved by the order dated 19.8.1998 in proceeding No. 1/75/98/Admn/1535 rejecting their claim of setting aside the order in Proceeding No.1/75/95/Admn/4224 dated 31.1.1995 suspending the conferment of temporary status vide its T.O. Order No. 1/75/94-Admn. 3275 dated 11.2.1994. The respondents are sought to be directed to regularise their services.2. The respondents oppose the same by raising various contentions as stated in their reply affidavit. According to them, temporary status was conferred on all eligible casual labourers as on the date of the Office Order No. 1/75/94-Admn/3275 dated 11.2.1994. However, subsequently in accordance with the clarifications contained in the subsequent O.M. dated 12.7.1994 issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, the respondents suspended the operation of the Office Order dated 11.2.1994 by which temporary status was conferred on all casual labourers, the main objection being that th...
T.B. Abdul Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Jun-18-1999
1. The applicant was initially engaged as a Casual Driver at the Cochin Regional Unit of the Narcotics Control Bureau during August, 1991.While working as such, when the office was shifted to Trivandrum, the applicant was also transferred to Trivandrum and was continued to be engaged in the 4th respondent's office, where he is still continuing.Though the applicant has been continuously working since 1991 and has completed more than 206 days in a year when the Scheme for Grant of Temporary Status and Regularisation dated 10th September 1993 (Annexure Al) came into force, the claim of the applicant for grant of temporary status and regularisation is not being considered by the respondents.He submitted a representation on 8.2.95 (Annexure A2) to the second respondent claiming the benefit of temporary status and regularisation.The applicant states that in the year 1993 he has completed 273 days, in 1994, 255 days, in 1995, 347 days, in 1996, 352 days and in 1997, 279 days and that as the ...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »