Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court March 2002 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.
C.S. Subramanian Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Mar-06-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ466CAT
1. The Original Application is filed by the applicant a retired Director (GEOL) Selection Grade, Geological Survey of India (Operations) Kerala, Trivandrum, aggrieved by A-1 order dated 8.2.99 issued by the first respondent rejecting his claim to count the service rendered by him as Geological Assistant in the State Geologist Department of Industries and Commerce and Ground Water Cell of the Public Health Department of the Govt. of Tamil Nadu. He sought the following reliefs through this O.A. (a) to call for the records leading to Annexure A-1 and quashing the same. (b) to issue a direction to the respondents to refix the pensionary benefits of the applicant counting the service rendered by him as Geological Assistant in the office of the State Geologist in the Department of Industries and Commerce, Govt. of Tamil Nadu from 17.6.1963 to 31.3.1965 and further to count the service rendered by him in the ground Water Cell of the Public Health Department, Govt. of Tamil Nadu from 1.4.65 t...
N. Babu Vs. the Flag Officer
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Mar-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ360CAT
1. The applicant, an orthopaedically handicapped unemployed youth, was sponsored by the Vocational Rehabilitation Centre, Trivandrum (A-1) for selection to the post of unskilled Labourer under the Headquarters, Southern Naval Command, Cochin against 3% quota reserved for the physically handicapped (A-2). The applicant thereafter sent aduly filled and verified attestation form (A-3). The applicant who was given to understand that he was selected, did not get appointment though 2 similarly selected candidates were appointed. He claims to have made enquiries at the Southern Naval Command, Cochin, when he is said to have been informed that he would soon receive appointment orders.Repeated enquiries entailed similar promises but no appointment order was issued according to the applicant. The applicant made a representation A-5 dated 18.6.99 to the 1st respondent. There was no response to that either. The applicant is aggrieved by the respondents' failure to issue appointment order to him a...
Bir Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-04-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ84CAT
1. Both learned Counsel heard. The applicant has impugned the letter dated 15.11.2000 issued by the respondents by which they have rejected his claim for refixation of pay on re-employment which, according to the applicant, is arbitrary, mala fide, discriminatory and against the principles of natural justice.2. This is the second round of litigation of the applicant. The earlier O.A. filed by the applicant (O.A. 33/97) was disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 25.7.2000 directing the respondents to take a final decision in the matter in accordance with rules and instructions regarding his pay fixation. Accordingly the aforesaid impugned order dated 15.11.2000 has been passed.3. The brief relevant facts of the case are that the applicant retired as Havildar in East Infantry in the Army on 15.2.83. Subsequently he was re-employed with the Respondent No. 3 i.e., 510, Army Base Workshop, Meerut Cantonment as a civilian employee with effect from 23.7.1984. One of the main contention...
Subhash Ramkishan Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Mar-04-2002
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ164CAT
1. The applicant who was working as Khalasi under the respondent No. 2 at Dahod workshop is aggrieved on account of penalty of removal from service imposed on him by the Disciplinary Authority (DA) vide order dated 2.6.92 (Annexure A-5) upheld by the Appellate Authority (AA) vide order dated 25.1.93 (Annexure A-6) and has prayed that the same be quashed.2. According to the applicant while he was working as Khalasi at Dahod workshop under Chief Workshop Manager, CWM he was served with a charge-sheet dated 22.2.88 (Annexure-A) alleging that at the time of his initial appointment as a casual labour in Railway Workshop Dahod, he produced service card indicating his previous working under I.O.W Bharuch from 25.6.82 to 26.7.82, 1.8.82 to 7.8.82 and 9.8.82 to 10.9.82 and the said service card is found bogus during the preventive check of CVI RTM in October 1987 and thus he had managed to get the appointment of casual labour on the strength of the said bogus card thereby cheating the Railway ...
Sh. Fanai Pahnuna Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Guwahati
Decided on: Mar-01-2002
Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ76CAT
1. The legality and validity as to the initiation and continuance of the proposed enquiry against the applicant under the All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969 is the core issue raised in this application in the following circumstances: The applicant was recruited to the India Administrative Service (IAS for short) of the Joint Arunachal Pradesh, Goa, Mizoram and Union Territories (AGMU for short) Cadre under Section 7 of the IAS (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 by competitive Examination in the year 1965.In the year 1990 the applicant was appointed as Chief Secretary to the Government of Mizoram, which post he held till 1993. The applicant was thereafter appointed as Managing Director, DSFDC Ltd., cum Principal Secretary (SC & ST), Government of NCT of Delhi in the year 1994 and he continued to hold the said post till 1998. The applicant was subsequently appointed as full time Member of the Public Grievances Commission, Government of NCT of Delhi and the applicant retire...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- Next ›