Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court January 2003 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.
Jivan Shukla Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-30-2003
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ360CAT
1. By this Original Application Under Section 19 of A.T. Act, 1985 applicant has challenged the order dated 10.1.1996 (Annexure-1) by which an earlier decision communicated to the applicant vide order No.324 dated 28.2.1994 has been reviewed and the applicant has been held not entitled for pensionary benefits.2. The facts in short, giving rise to this application are that Jivan Shukla was appointed as L.D.C. on 21.10.1955 in the office of Controller of Defence Account (in short C.D. A.) (Pension), Allahabad.He was promoted subsequently as an Auditor. On 10.9.1974, applicant gave an application requesting the respondents for accepting his voluntary retirement w.e.f. 1.11.1975. In this letter applicant also prayed for grant of pension and gratuity for 20 years of service. The request of the applicant for voluntary retirement was accepted by order dated 15.11.1979 (Annexure-5) w.e.f. 1.11.1975. This order also said that applicant shall not be entitled to any pensionary benefits for the p...
P. Shankaraiah Vs. General Manager, South Central
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Jan-24-2003
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ105CAT
1. This application is filed by the applicant seeking for a declaration that the action of the respondents in not considering his application for promotion to ACM on the ground that he was found unfit for open line and strenuous job due to physical deformity of right lower limb as per the Certificate issued by the Authorised Medical Officer/Medical Director, Railway Hospital, Lalaguda, and through the impugned proceedings dated 2.11.2001 as totally illegal, without jurisdiction and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India, and consequently for a direction to the respondents to promote him to the post of ACM without reference to the physical deformity in terms of Railway Board's letter dated 6.10.1999 read with advance correction slips 75 and 76 issued by the Railway Board with all consequential benefits. The applicant belongs to S.C. Community having qualification of M.A. LL.B: He was appointed in the Railway service on 25.6.1977 as Junior Clerk and subsequently he...
Sajit Kumar, P. and ors. Vs. the Chief Commissioner of Income
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT
Decided on: Jan-17-2003
Reported in: (2004)(2)SLJ61CAT
1. 24 applicants in this batch of cases have prayed for the following reliefs: (i) To call for the records leading to the issuance of office memorandum No. F. No. 212(17)/2000-01/CCIT dated 25.1.2001 at Annexure A-8 and on perusal to quash the same as arbitrary, unjust and illegal; (ii) To call for the records leading to the issuance of office memorandum No. 9/NGE/98 No. 108/NGE(APP.)/3-97 dated 23.1.1998 at Annexure A-9 and on perusal to quash Para 5(c) of the said memorandum as illegal and unjust and violative of the law laid down by Supreme Court in R.K. Sabharwal's case. (iii) To call for the records leading to the issuance of office memorandum No. 36012/2/96-Estt. (RES) dated 2.7.1997 at Annexure A-6 and on perusal to quash the same to the extent it restricts the effect of the said office memorandum only from 2.7.1997 since it has the impact of postponing the operation of the law laid down by Supreme Court in R.K. Sabharwal's case from 10.2.1995 to 2.7.1997, as Violative of the l...
P. Shivakumar and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT
Decided on: Jan-14-2003
Reported in: (2004)(2)SLJ353CAT
1. The applicants filed these O.As. see king direction to the respondents to grant them incentive bonus/incentive allowance in pursuance of Circular No. PC-V/98/1/7/4/1 dated 21.6.99 issued by the Railway Board, Ministry of Railways, Government of India (Annexure A-4) and to pay them arrears with effect from the date the benefit was payable to them and to continue to pay the said benefit in accordance with the Circular.2. The contentions advanced by the learned Counsel for the applicants are as follows: The applicants are working in the Railway Workshop of Southern Railways in Mysore as Junior Engineers Gr. I, Grade II, Supervisors, Progressmen, Adremo Operators in Production Control Organisation (PCO).Incentive bonus is payable for extra-production and is admissible to all the Railway Workshops. Justice Pandian, a retired Judge of the Hon'ble Supreme Court recommended payment of incentive bonus to indirect employees like the applicants who contribute to production.The applicants are ...
Raja Ram Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Decided on: Jan-10-2003
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ365CAT
1. Raja Ram Verma has filed this original application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act and has sought the following reliefs: "(a) This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to quash the impugned order contained in Annexure A-3 in so far as it relates issue of fresh charge sheet and also quash the fresh charge sheet dated 28.12.93 contained in Annexure No. A-4. (b) This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased further to quash all other consequential orders contained in Annexures No. A-5, A-6 issued by the respondent No. 2 after the issue of fresh charge sheet dt. 28.12.93 nominating fresh Enquiry Officers and Presenting Officer. (c) This Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased further to quash the impugned order dated 29.9.95 contained in Annexure No. A-10. (d) Any other relief which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case be given to the applicant.2. The indubitable facts, as necessary for resolving the controversy involved in this case are, that the applicant...
Harish Chandra Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jodhpur
Decided on: Jan-07-2003
Reported in: (2003)(2)SLJ441CAT
1. This M.A. 133/2002 has been filed by Shri Harish Chandra Singh in O.A. No. 282/2002 - Harish Chandra Singh v. Union of India and Ors. and has prayed that the delay, if any, in filing the O.A. has occurred, the same may kindly be condoned in the interest of justice and the O.A.filed by the applicant may kindly be decided on merit.2. The brief facts necessary for disposal of this M.A. are that the applicant was temporarily appointed on the post of L.D.C. on 1.1.1988.His appointment was on ad hoc basis and he joined on the said post on 7.1.1988. He was appointed on probation on 19.9.1988 as L.D.C. He got his further promotion to the post of U.D.C vide an order dated 4.9.1998. His main prayer in the O.A. is for reckoning him the seniority from 7.1.1988 i.e., the date of working on ad hoc basis on the post of L.D.C, with all consequential benefits including promotion, from the date his next junior had been promoted. His next junior Shri Rajeev Pandey (with appointment date 23.1.1988) wa...
Shri M.P. Bansal Vs. Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan and
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jan-03-2003
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ311CAT
1. The applicant is aggrieved by the committee's order dated 4.5.1998 passed by the respondents whereby the respondents have imposed on the applicant the penalty of 10% cut in pension for a period of three years. He has also prayed for quashing the order dated 19.4.1999 regarding recovery from stagnation increments with a direction to the respondents to calculate his full amount of pension, gratuity and other pensionary benefits without giving effect to the impugned order dated 4.5.1998. He has also prayed for interest at 18% per annum to be paid to him from the date of his retirement i.e. 30.11.1992 till the date of actual payment.2. The brief relevant facts of the case are that the applicant, who retired from service with the respondent-Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS)-as Principal on 30.11.1992, was posted on deputation as Director of Education, Lakshadweep Administration during the years 1986-88.During that period, according to the respondents, there was a complaint against him ...
Dr. S.K. Tandon Vs. Council of Scientific and
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Decided on: Jan-02-2003
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ237CAT
1. The applicant of this O.A. has prayed for issue of directions for setting aside the impugned order dated 19th October, 2001 and 13th October, 2001 contained in Annexures No. A-19 and A-21 and further for directing the respondents to pay the sum of Rs. 76,793/- representing the pay and allowances for a period of 78 days wrongfully and illegally deducted from the retirement gratuity of the applicant. It is also prayed that directions be issued to the respondents for setting aside the impugned orders dated 30.5.2001 and 22.6.2001 as contained in Annexure No. A-14 and A-17 regarding treating of the period between 28.5.2001 to 1.6.2001 as dies non.2. Learned Counsel for the parties have been heard and pleadings on record have been perused.3. As per Annexure A-19 dated 19.10.2001 to the amendment application, the applicant was found not to have signed the attendance register for 73 days between 21st March, 2001 and 23rd September, 2001. The said annexure contains a recital to the effect ...
All India Hot Weather, Watermen Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-01-2003
Reported in: (2003)(3)SLJ29CAT
1. The present O.A. had been filed under Section 19 of the A.T. Act, 1985, before the Principal Bench, New Delhi. However, vide order dated 7.7.1995 the Original Application has been transferred to this Bench and the same was received on 7.8.1995. 44 applicants including the association namely "All India Hot Weather Waterman Association have sought for the following reliefs:-- (i) to direct the respondents to provide employment to the Temporary Hot Weather Watermen M.R.C.Ls by absorbing them in different departments of the Railways; (ii) to direct the respondents to prepare a consolidated seniority list of the MRCLs working in all the departments of Railways and to frame a scheme to regularise them according to their seniority within a reasonable time; (iii) to direct the respondents to take the applicants back in job and to pay them the arrears of salary for the period they were kept illegally out of employment with interest and to pay them part of the salary during off seasons till ...
Gulam Mustafa and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad
Decided on: Jan-01-2003
Reported in: (2004)(1)SLJ119CAT
1. Both the above O.As. have been filed under Section 19 of the A.T.Act, 1985, challenging the panel of Passenger Guard (Grade Rs. 5,000-8,000) as declared by the Divisional Personnel Officer (in short DPO), Northern Railway, Allahabad, raising similar issue and, therefore, have been heard and are being decided by a common judgment.The leading O.A. being O.A. No. 829 of 2001.2. In O.A. No. 829 of 2001 the applicants have prayed for quashing the panel dated 5.7.2001 and have further sought a direction to the respondents to appoint the applicants on the post of Passenger Guard from the post of Senior Goods Guard, on which the applicants are presently working by applying the principle of recruitment by transfer from one post to another, considering only their suitability, as it does not involve any promotion at all. The applicants in the alternative have also sought a direction the respondents No. 1, 2 and 3 to appoint the applicants and other Senior Goods Guards working in the pay scale...
- ‹ Prev
- Next ›