Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court June 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.
K.M. Sayed and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Jun-26-2002
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ153CAT
1. The applicants, 17 in number, are Lecturers in different subjects in the two Junior Colleges in the Union Territory of Lakshadweep. Their claim to be treated on a par with Lecturers in Degree Colleges in the main land had been allowed by the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala and was eventually upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide A-1 and A-2. The applicants are now aggrieved by A-7 order dated 31.10.2000 whereby their joint representation, A-6 made in pursuance of the directions contained in this Tribunal's order in O.A. 417/2000 dated 24.4.2000 is disposed of by negativing their claim for placement in Senior Scale and Selection Grade for Lecturers on the basis of their qualifying service.In the impugned order A-7, the 2nd respondent, viz. the Administrator, U.T. of Lakshadweep, has held that the scale of pay of the Junior Lecturers in U.T. of Lakshadweep was to be on a par with that of the Lecturers in Degree Colleges under the Union of India in pursuance of the Apex Court's decisi...
Noor Mohammad B. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-24-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ255CAT
1. Shri Noor Mohammad B. has filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act praying therein for the following reliefs: "(1). This Honourable Tribunal be pleased to quash and set side the impugned order dated 6.7.2000 at Annexure "A" with its enclosure dated 24.4.2000 issued by the respondent No. 2 by holding it as illegal, unjust, improper, unfair, against the principles of equity and natural justice and be pleased to further hold that the same is not in confirmity with the policy of the compassionate appointment particularly in the present facts and circumstances of the case, the applicant is required to be reinstated in service with continuity of service and with all other consequential benefits including the back wages, promotions, seniority, and bonus, etc. (3) Any other order or direction as may be deem fit, just and proper may kindly be passed." 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant who is the brother of late Shri Mohammad Idrish who was work...
Smt. Vallam Badia Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ271CAT
1. Smt. Vallam Badia has filed this O.A. claiming the following reliefs: "A. It may be declared that the applicant widow is entitled to the family pension from the date of death of her husband i.e., 2.6.1990 i.e., from the due date on account of death of her husband Shri Sursing Ramola, who was working as Gangman, with all the consequential benefits, arrears as due, directing the respondents to fix her family pension and pay her all the arrears with interest at the rate of 12% from the date of which was due to be paid to her. AA. The deceased husband of applicant Shri Sursing Ramola be deemed to be regularised with effect from the date any junior to the deceased in seniority list i.e., after S. No. 895 and/or with effect from 25.4.89 the date on which deceased was transferred to open line for permanent absorption, as deemed fit. B. Any other better relief/s as this Hon'ble Tribunal deem just and proper looking to the facts and circumstances of the case may please be awarded to the app...
O.P. Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-21-2002
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ265CAT
1. The applicant who was working as Police Inspector CBI/SPE at Ahmedabad on deputation basis under the respondents is aggrieved on account of action on their part in not considering his request for absorption in CBI and wrongfully repatriating him and has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(A) That the Hon'ble Court be pleased to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for absorbing; the petitioner in the office of the Central Bureau of Investigation, effective from the previous date of joining of the petitioner in CBI, looking to the meritorious services rendered by the petitioner. (B) That the Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to hold that repatriation and the in action on the part of the respondents in absorbing the petitioner in the office or the Central Bureau of Investigation is illegal, unconstitutional and against the democratic pattern of the country. (BB) The Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to declare the impugned decision of the respondents not to extend the d...
Plaban Kumar Bhattacharya Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
Decided on: Jun-20-2002
Reported in: (2003)(1)SLJ73CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the A.T. Act, 1985 whereby the applicant calls in question the order of reversion dated 1.2.02 reverting him from the post of assistant Superintendent of Post Officer to the post of Inspector of Post Offices and the order dated 5.2.02 posting him as Inspector as also the order 5.3.02 rejecting his representation.2. The applicant joined the Postal Service on 28.6.78 as Postal Assistant. He was promoted to the post of Inspector of Post Offices on 28.8.86. He was further promoted as Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices of ad hoc basis. It is that on 15.6.98 a chargesheet was issued by respondent No. 1 and thereafter on enquiry he was punished with stoppage of five grade increments vide order dated 24.8.98, but on appeal the penalty was reduced to stoppage of increments for two years.It is further averred that the applicant was served another chargesheet on 7.8.2000 in which he was censured.The case for the applicant is that similarly situ...
Thakorbhai J. Desai Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-19-2002
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ269CAT
1. Mr. Thakorbhai J. Desai, has filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, praying therein that the respondents authorities may be directed to make payment of the pension to the applicant and allow him to opt for pension scheme and settle the pensionary dues of the present applicant along with 12% interest from the date of retirement.2. The factual metrics of the case are that the applicant joined the Railway service on 4.4.1941. He submitted his resignation on 21.8.1970 due to the family circumstances and his health problem. It is also the case of the applicant that he has put in 29 years and 9 months service without any blot on his service sheet. The pension scheme was introduced in 1957 and option forms were called for from the staff who joined before November 1957. Circulars were issued from time to time.However, it is said that the applicant had no notice for such circulars nor got any instructions in this regard from Railway Authorities. In this ...
P. Prahladan Vs. Superintendent of Post Offices
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Jun-19-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ432CAT
1. The applicant was recruited under Sports quota and was posted as Extra Departmental Messenger, Medical College Post Office, Alappuzha.In the Select List published by A-2 memo dated 18.1.96 the applicant was at Sl. No. 3. He was allotted to Alappuzha division by A-2 letter and later re-allotted to Alappuzha Sub Division by A-3 letter date 22.1.96. Accordingly he was appointed as E.D. Messenger, Alappuzha-5 w.e.f. 5.3.96 as per A-4 memo dated 26.3.96. The applicant assumed charge as E.D. Messenger on 29.1.96 and continued in the post till the post was abolished in January, 1998. On abolition of the post he was appointed as Extra Departmental Delivery Agent. Avalookunnu Sub Office on 27.1.98 where he was continuing even at the time of filing of this O.A. The applicant claimed that he was selected for appointment as E.D.Agent for eventually absorbing him under Group-C under 5% vacancies set apart for Sports quota. The applicant stated that the Kerala Postal Sports Board decided to call...
V.P. Sharma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-19-2002
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ111CAT
1. Mr. V.P. Sharma has filed this Original Application under Section-19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act praying therein that impugned orders dated 1-3.4.2001 (A-I) passed by the Revising Authority (Annexure-A) the order dated 29th June 2000 (Annexure A-I) passed by the Appellate Authority and letter dated 29.5.2002 (Annexure A-II) passed by the Disciplinary Authority wherein the penalty of removal from service has been imposed and upheld in appeal as well as in the revision.2. The factual matrix of the case as brought out in the original application is that the applicant was unable to attend to his duty for 31 days and he sent the communication through under Postal Certificate on dated 27.5.1998 for a period of 15 days and another certificate was sent for further extension of 15 days on dated 11.6.1998. He submitted the UPCs in proof of his action regarding intimation to the Competent Authority. Further the case of the applicant is that when he met the Works Manager he was threaten...
P.K. Mittal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-17-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ72CAT
1. Shri P.K. Mittal has filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 with the following prayers: (i) The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to quash and set aside the charge-sheet dated 19.11.1993 at Annexure A-7 issued by the respondent No. 3 herein, since the applicant has been fully exonerated by the Inquiry Officer and the charges levelled against him are not at all proved and the order directing denovo enquiry under order dated 19.2.1997 and 26.2.1997 and all consequential orders by holding the same as illegal, null and void. (ii) The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to direct the respondents to consider him eligible for all the benefits due and admissible under the rules regard to his pay, promotion and selection for higher posts etc., ignoring the disciplinary proceedings and also to pay him arrears of salary in respect of the same as due. (iii) The Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to declare the suspension of the applicant from 15.4.1993 to 3.12.1993 a...
Jamnadas D. Chudasma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Jun-17-2002
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ53CAT
1. Shri Jamnadas D. Chudasma has filed this O.A. under Section 19 of the Administrative Act, 1985, praying therein that the respondents may be directed to implement the revisional authorities order dated 6/7.4.2000. Annexure-A, without prejudice to his right and contentions to prefer departmental appeal before me General Manager.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was faced with the disciplinary proceedings for major penalty. An oral enquiry was held, the enquiry officer held the charges as proved and punishment of removal from service was inflicted by the disciplinary authority. The applicant challenges the said penalty order before this Bench of the Tribunal vide O.A. No. 734/98, the same was disposed of vide order dated 10.6.99 with a direction to the respondents that if the applicant prefers a revision petition (Annexure A-1) the respondents will decide the same as expeditiously as possible. He accordingly preferred a revision petition on dated 2.7.99 (Annexure A...
- ‹ Prev
- 2
- Next ›
- Last »