Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court June 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.
Vasant Ladagya Gawand Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-07-2001
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking to quash and set aside the order Annexure--'A-1' dated 6.12.1994, stopping of H.R.A. with effect from 1.12.1993 which is illegal and payment of the same.2. Perusal of the impugned order is necessary for proper appreciation of the subject matter which is as under: With reference to his application dated 23.3.1994, Shri V.L. Gawand, Artist Engraver, is informed that since his wife is in occupation of Govt. accommodation at the same station, he is not entitled for drawal of H.R.A. with effect from 25.12.74. Accordingly, his H.R.A. recovery for the period from 25.12.74 to 30.11.93 is worked out to Rs. 77,329/-. He is therefore hereby directed to remit the above amount in the Mint Treasury either in lumpsum or in suitable instalments by cash or through his monthly salary so that entire amount of recovery may be made before his retirement." 3. The perusal of the impugned order makes it clear that H....
M.S. Madhu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-07-2001
1. The applicant was working as a Assistant Chief Accounts Officer In-charge in the year 1986 under the respondent No. 3 and he was served with a charge sheet on dated 2.9.86 leveling certain imputations regarding unauthorised purchase of cloth cover etc. The grievance of the applicant is that disciplinary inquiry started against him in 1986 by the issuance of the said charge sheet, is yet not finalised by the respondents even though he has retired from the service on attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 31.3.98. He has also made a grievance that he has not been paid his retirement dues and even though time and again he had requested for finalisation of the inquiry proceedings, pending against him, on the pretext or another the respondents have continued to delay the finalisation of the proceedings. He has therefore prayed that the inquiry proceedings, inordinately delayed by the respondents be quashed and set aside and the respondents be directed to pay all his retira...
D.D. Mistry and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-07-2001
1. The applicants by moving this O. A under the provisions of Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 have challenged the memorandum dated 9.2.98 contending that the restriction imposed by this memorandum to claim the LTC by the Central Government employees is unreasonable and has no nexus to achieve the goal of the scheme. They have prayed that the of India. The impugned O.M. No. 31011/4/97-Estt.(A memo be quashed and set aside as the same is arbitrary, unjust, unreasonable and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution) reads as under: "As the Ministry of Finance, etc. are aware Central Government employees . are entitled for home town LTC once in a block of two years and All India LTC once in a block of 4 years. The Leave Travel Concession is not admissible for journey by a private car (owned, borrowed or hired) or a bus, van or other vehicle owned or operated or chartered by private operators. However, travel by private buses operating as regular service from...
G.N. Rao and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-06-2001
1. Challenge in this OA is directed against the respondents' Notification dated 4.11.1996, proposing to fill up, adopting the policy of reservation, the vacant post of Foreman 'B' in the pay scale of Rs.2000-3200/-, which arose on 1.1.1993, on account of restructuring of the cadre.2. Heard S/Shri G.S. Walia and Shri S.C. Dhawan learned Counsel for the applicant and the respondents respectively.3. All the five applicants are working as Foreman 'B', on ad hoc basis w.e.f. various dates during June, 1995 to February, 1996. This is a selection post usually to be filled by written test as well as viva-vocc, though at times a modified selection process is adopted for filling up the above by way of seniority-cum-fitness. The category of Technical Supervisors in Railway to which applicants belonged was restructured by letter dated 27.1.1993, as on 1.3.1993, which letter directed that vacancies arising on 1.3.1993 should be filled by modified selection procedure and the selection procedure whi...
V.M. Narayanan Vs. the Chief General Manager,
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Jun-01-2001
1. The applicant was working as a Telephone Operator in the Telecom Exchange, Thalassery at the material time. This O.A. is filed against A-VIII order dated 25.9.98 whereby the Chief General Manager, Telecommunications, Kerala Circle, Trivandrum, rejected the applicant's detailed representation dated 21.2.97 (A-VII) praying for grant of benefit of Efficiency Bar (E.B. for short) crossing from the due date of 1.7.83 as against 1.7.88, allowed as per A-II order dated 28.7.92 and allowing him the One Time Bound Promotion (O.T.B.P. for short) due in 1993. The applicant seeks the following reliefs: (i) set aside Annexure A-IV and A-VIII and A-X orders rejecting the representations of the applicant; (ii) declare that the applicant is entitled to be permitted to cross his E.B. with effect from 1.7.83 at the stage of pay of Rs. 300/- in pro-revised scale of pay and to get his OTBP promotion in 1994 and to get all consequential benefits. (iii) direct the respondents to give the applicant all t...
M. Krishna Das Vs. the Chairman, Railway Board and
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Jun-01-2001
1. The applicant joined the Southern Railway on 3.1.68 as a Trade Apprentice. Unfortunately his left leg had to be amputated. He was therefore absorbed as Telephone Operator in the year 1979. The applicant made representation that he may be posted as Train Examiner (Controller). On the said request by order dated 25.9.1982 of the Divisional Railway Manager, the applicant was posted as Train Examiner (Controller) at Palghat Divisional Office in the scale of Rs. 425-700 subject to the condition that he would rank juniormost to all permanent and temporary Train Examiners on the date of joining, that his posting to work in the control office was purely temporary and that in case the necessity for operating the post of TXR in control office ceases or if his performance was found not satisfactory, he would have to go back as Telephone Operator (Annexure A4). Thereafter by order dated 6.11.87 the applicant was promoted as Head Train Examiner (HTXR for short) in the scale of Rs. 1600-2660 and...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›