Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court October 2001 Judgments

Bharat Chandra Dhali and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata

1. Through this application under Section 19 of the A.T Act, the applicants who are 12 in number have called in question the transfer order dated 1.05.2001 and the release order 22.6.2001 in so far as they relate to them. A declaration that the O.M dated 30.9.2001 is ultra vires of Arts. 309 and 14 of the Constitution of India, has also been sough.2. The facts of the case are these. The applicants were initially appointed as junior Telecom Officer (in short JTO) in the year of 1974.They were promoted to the post of TES-B/S.D. Engineer in the years 1994 to 2000. It is stated that prior to the formation of the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. (in short BSNL) in September 2000 the applicants were discharging duties and function as employees of the DOT being Government of India employees within the meaning of Article 311 of the Constitution of India and their status as the employees of the Govt. of India continues even after formation of the BSNL. It is further stated that no definite notificati...

Dr. Binoy Krishna Mandal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ25CAT

1. The legitimacy of the order of transfer and posting of the applicant from Indian Council of Agricultural Research Complex Headquarters, Umiam to Indian Council of Agricultural Research Complex, Tripura Centre, Lembucherra vide order dated 29.6.2001 is the subject matter of the controversy that requires adjudication. A thumb-nail sketch of the basic facts relevant for the purpose of adjudication are outlined hereinbelow: The applicant at the relevant time was holding the post of Principal Scientist (Fish and Fishery Science) in the Indian Council of Agricultural Research, Research Complex for NEH Region, Umiam, Meghalaya (hereinafter referred to as ICAR).2. The ICAR Research Complex for NEH Region was established in the year 1975 with a view to aid and assist the agricultural development in the NEH Region of the country. It is the pioneering institute of its kind set up by ICAR that emcompasses all the disciplines of agriculture, horticulture, animal sciences, agricultural, engineer...

S.A.S. Navas and ors. Vs. Commissioner of Customs and anr.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam

Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ225CAT

1. The first four applicants working as Superinten- dent of Customs and the fifth applicant working as Preventive Officer have filed this Original Application aggrieved by A-1 Administrative Circular No. 24/99 dated 21.10.99 issued by the first respondent stating the decision to recover the excess paid overtime allowances from the individuals concerned. They sough the following reliefs: (ii) To direct not to recover any part of the overtime allowance paid from January 1986 to July, 1996. (iii) To grant such other reliefs as may be prayed for and the Tribunal may deem fit to grant.2. According to the applicants all operative staff of the department, to which category the applicants belong, were eligible for overtime allowance as per the orders in force and till July, 1996 first respondent was allowing night weightage at the rate of 20 minutes for every one hour between 20 hrs and 6 hrs and overtime allowance was being paid accordingly. From August, 1996 onwards they were paid overtime ...

S. Rama Murthy Vs. Addl. Registrar, Rly. Claims

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT

1. The above O. As have been heard together for the reason that the respondents, who ace common, have raised an additional plea in their reply, which has been allowed by us to be a part of their reply, to the effect that the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) does not have the jurisdiction to adjudicate the matters pertaining to the conditions of service of a Member of the Railway Claims Tribunal (RCT), The applicant was a Member of the RCT. He has appeared in person before us in the present OAs, being aggrieved by certain decisions of the Chairman of the Railway Claims Tribunal allegedly affecting the conditions of his service adversely.2. Since the issue of jurisdiction is a basic and threshold issue, we have heard both sides at length on that score.3. The applicant has vigorously argued that the RCT does not constitute an independent judicial service and that a Member of the said Tribunal should on the other hand be treated as holding a civil post under the Union, as distinct fr...

P.V.S. Kameswari Vs. the Director General of Medical

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. The applicant was served with the charge memo dt. 26.11.98 containing one article of charge viz., that while she was functioning as LDC, Military Hospital, Golconda during 1992-93 misappropriated an amount of Rs. 45,000/- by falsifying accounts and by creating false and forged documents. As she denied the charge, an enquiry was held under Rule-14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The Enquiry Officer submitted report finding her guilty, the Disciplinary Authority by order dt. 17.4,2000 considering al! aspects of thecase and the gravity of the charge imposed the penalty of dismissal from service. Without carrying the matter in appeal, the applicant filed the present OA before us.2. Learned Counsel for the applicant Sri K. Lakshmi Narasimha questions the competency of the authority who issued the charge memo as well as the authority who passed the impugned order. It is argued that the Dircctor General, Medical Services (Army) was neither the appointing authority nor the Disciplinary Authority...

Mahendra Prasad Mehta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

1. This application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 has arisen and is directed against the action of the respondents for adhering to the sealed cover procedure in the matter of promotion of the applicant in the following circumstances.The applicant joined as an Officer in the Railway service and initially he was assigned to the Central Railway Cadre and subsequently transferred to the N.F. Railway. He was promoted to the Junior Administrative Grade on ad hoc basis in September 1996. The name for empanelment of Junior Administrative Grade came up for consideration in the year 1997. A panel was approved on 13.11.97. The case of the applicant was considered and kept in sealed cover. By order dated 1.12.97 the respondents appointed 35 officers belonging to the applicant's batch to officiate in Junior Administrative Grade from the date of their taking over the post. The applicant's name did not figure in the list. The applicant submitted representation before the...