Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court February 2002 Judgments

B.K. Katkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ345CAT

1. These eleven Original Applications moved under Section 19 of Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 have been filed by junior Telecom Officers posted at different divisions of Maharashtra Circle of Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited (in Short, BSNL) who have been transferred by a common transfer order. The transfer of each of the applicant is from their respective Telecom Division to Goa Telecom Division. The transfer order has been communicated to applicants by Assistant General Manager (SI) at the office of Chief General Manager, Telecom, Maharastra Circle, Mumbai by letter dated 26.11.2000 on a letter head of BSNL wherein it is stated that as per approval of Chief General Manager Maharashtra Circle, Mumbai the said transfers and postings are ordered.As each applicant has challenged the order of transfer by filing separate O.A. In these O.As., beside taking common grounds, they have raised pleas on merit applicable to individual cases.2. The facts giving rise to these O.As. are that the ap...

Adhip Chandra Chaudhuri Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ192CAT

1. Applicant was Commissioner of Income-Tax, Ranchi from 1994 to 1997.On 11.6.97 he was arrested in a criminal case and was bailed out by the Hon'ble Patna High Court vide order dt. 3.9.97. Because of his arrest in the criminal case, he was placed under suspension vide order dt.2.9.97 w.e.f. 11.6.97, the date on which he was arrested by the police.Charge-sheet has been filed against the applicant along with many others in the infamous case known as "Fodder Scam Case." 2. The case for the applicant in this O.A. is that he has been falsely roped in the criminal case and that more than two years have passed, but no departmental proceedings have been initiated against him. It has been stated that the right of the applicant to earn livelihood is a fundamental right and it cannot be taken away or whittled down without any authority of law. It has further been averred that the act of the respondents in placing the applicant under suspension is mala fide and is unjust enrichment to the respon...

Amit Sahai, Ifs Vs. State of Assam and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati

Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ152CAT

1. This application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 has arisen and is directed against the order dated 20.11.2001 transferring and posting the applicant as Deputy Conservator of Forests attached to the Conservator of Forests, Lower Assam Social Forestry Circle, Bongaigaon. A thumbnail sketch, relevant for the purpose of adjudication of the O.A. is summed up below: The applicant is a member of the Indian Forest Officer (IPS for short), recruited under Section 7 of the IPS (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 read with Section 8 of the IFS (Appointment by Competitive Examination) Regulations, 1967, allocated to the Assam Wing of the Assam-Meghalaya Joint Cadre. The applicant, on his return from Central deputation, by order dated 9.8.2000 was posted as Divisional Forest Officer, Aie Valley Division, Bongaigaon. The said order was modified by order dated 6.9.2000 and he was appointed as Divisional Forest Officer, Western Assam Afforestation Division on temporary basis and ...

Amal Kumar Sarkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ272CAT

1. The dispute raised in this O.A. is whether the respondents are entitled to realise the "damages" for unauthorised occupation of quarter beyond the admissible period after retirement by the applicant from his Dearness Relief on Pension.2. The applicant was working in the office of India Audit & Accounts Department as Senior Auditor, Calcutta. He retired from service on superannuation w.e.f. 31.5.88 and after his retirement he has been granted all his retiral benefits including pension and he has been receiving the same regularly.3. While he was in service, he was allotted a Govt. accommodation viz.Flat No. 161, Block-AF, Type-Ill, Salt Lake City, Calcutta. After his retirement, he was allowed to retain the said quarter for the admissible period. According to the applicant, he retained the said quarter even thereafter and vacated the same on 31.8.89. However, this contention of the applicant is disputed by the respondents and according to them, he vacated the said quarter on 14.1...

Pradip Kumar Ghosh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ266CAT

1. Though this O.A., the applicant has prayed for a direction to the respondents to regularise his service on the post of Caretaker of GPO Building, Calcutta and a further direction to the respondents to grant him the benefit of fixation of pay in terms of 5th Pay Commission Report.2. The applicant joined service as Postal Assistant in the scale of Rs. 975-1500/- on 22.11.79 at Calcutta GPO. Pursuant to a circular dated 27.10.90 inviting applications from willing Postal Assistants of GPO for filling up the post of Caretaker, GPO, Calcutta in the scale of Rs. 1200-2040/- on ad hoc basis, the applicant applied for the said post, he having the requisit qualifications as enumerated in the said circular. By an order dt. 28.11.90, the applicant was directed to work as Caretaker on ad hoc basis and on purely temporary measure. It was made clear that this arrangement would not confer any right upon him to continue in the post and that the same may be terminated at any time without notice (vid...

Mohd. Abdul Latif Molla Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata

Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ281CAT

1. Md. Abdul Latif Molla, resident of Chota Bakri, P.O. Chandaneswar, District - South 24 - Parganas has filed this application against the selection of OBC candidate on the post of Extra Departmental Delivery Agent (EDDA) at Chandaneswar Post Office and has prayed for the following reliefs: (a) To give employment to the applicant to the post of E.D.D.A. as advertised by the Postal Department. (b) To direct the respondents to give employment to the applicant to the post of E.D.D.A.2. The fact of the case as it appears from the O.A. is that the Sub-Divisional Inspector Postal, Sonarpur Sub-Division, South 24-Parganas made a requisition to the local Employment Exchange asking for name of suitable candidates for the post of Extra Departmental Delivery Agent (EDDA) as stated in para 4.3 as per notice enclosed as Annexure-C. The petitioner applied before the Employment Exchange which sent the application to the Sub-Divisional Inspector of Post Offices.Since the application has not reached ...

Dr. M.K. Nair Vs. the President, Indian Council of

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam

Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ401CAT

1. The applicant while functioning as Director, Central Plantation Crops Research Institute, Kasargagod under the Indian Counsel of Agricultural Research (ICAR for short) was served with a memorandum of charges dated 3.10.1996. The Articles of Charges were as follows: "(1) While functioning as Director in 1990-1992, grave irregularities were committed by him in sanction of one Club Hall without being competent to do so which included deliberate splitting of cost in order to avoid seeking approval of the Council, not floating of open tender and getting it constructed from private parties at a cost of Rs. 3.12. lakhs (appx.) and thereby failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty. (2) While functioning as Director 1990-92 grave irregularities were committed by him in sanction of one Conference Hall without being competent to do so, which included deliberate splitting of cost in order to avoid seeking approval of the Council, not floating of open tender, getting it constructe...

K. Bhaskar Vs. the Commanding Officer and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT

1. The applicant, who was initially employed in the canteen of the respondents as a casual labour in December 1990, later on appointed as Sales Assistant with effect from 1.4.1992 and promoted as Store Assistant Grade I from 1.12.1995, has filed the present application challenging the order of punishment imposed on him in a disciplinary proceeding, inter alia praying therein to; (ii) Quash the Disciplinary Proceedings under the Memorandum No. TCU/1/ 190/1/ORG dated 14.12.2000, (Annexure A-1) as excessive, arbitrary and, therefore, void. While directing the respondents to treat the applicant as a Government servant and draw all consequential service and monetary benefits. (in) Consequently, direct the respondents to draw the pay and allowances for the intervening period i.e., from the date of removal till the date of reinstatement with interest. (iv) Pass any other order or direction as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Tribunal in (he interest of justice, equity and fairplay in administratio...