Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court February 2007 Judgments

Jit Kumar Son of Shri Nathu Ram Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh

1. Applicant has filed the present O.A. claiming interest on delayed payments of his retiral dues.2. Applicant retired from service under the respondents as Accountant on 31.12.2003. He was charge sheeted on 10.10.2001. Regular inquiry was conducted against him and the Inquiry Officer submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority, Respondent No. 2, on 23.12.2003 in which the charges leveled against him were held `not proved'. The Disciplinary Authority accepted the report of the Inquiry Officer and ordered that the chargesheet be filed. It was further ordered that suspension period of the applicant, w.e.f. 21.8.2001 to 3.3.2003 be treated as leave of the kind due, vide order, dated 22.7.2004.Applicant made an appeal against this order on 3.9.2004, but the same has not been decided so far.3. Before his retirement, applicant had withdrawn 90% of his GPF amount. After retirement, an amount of Rs. 16,045/- was paid to him on 6.2.2004. Applicant states that this amount could not be hi...

K. Unnikumaran Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Madras

Reported in: (2008)(1)SLJ285CAT

1. The applicant who worked as highly skilled Grade-I Heavy Vehicles Factory has sought the following reliefs; (i) to call for the records relating to the impugned order of the 1st respondent bearing No. 571/A/' (Genl)/Ex-Journcymanship dated 19.11.2004 and set aside the same and consequently direct the respondents to consider and promote the applicant to the post of Supervisor 'B' (T) in the scale of Rs. 175-6.205-7-240 with effect from 25.1.1967 as has been given to Shri K. Narayana Swamy, who wasjunior Workman-B, with all furthcrpromotions, pay fixation and retiral benefits, with all arrears of pay and allowances and (ii) to pass such other orders or directions as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case award cost and render justice.2. The applicant joined as Artisan Trainee (under Artisan Training Scheme) for the post-training employment at Artisan Training School at Avadi through an All India Entrance Test. He under went the basic training f...

Ripu Daman Verma Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow

Reported in: (2007)(3)SLJ346CAT

1. The Original Application 469 of 1998 has been filed by the applicant Dipu Daman Verma (address given in the O.A.) against the action of the respondents in not counting his seniority as on the date of initial appointment i.e. 14.2.1969 to the post of Junior Medical Officer, Post and Telegraph on ad hoc basis but w.e.f. 10.3.1972 when he was appointed on selection to the post on a regular basis in accordance with rules, basis on the recommendations of Union Public Service Commission as provided under rules.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed on the post of Junior Medical Officer by the P&T Board, Govt. of India, vide notification dated 10.7.1969 on purely temporary and ad hoc basis. The applicant was subsequently regularized on the basis of the recommendation of the UPSC vide their letter No. E-1/6089117) 71 RD dated 10.3.72, he was accordingly posted as Medical Officer (General Duty Officer II) of Central Health Services from 10.3,1972 on regular basi...

ishwar Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Reported in: (2007)(3)SLJ299CAT

1. In this O.A. the applicant has sought quashing and setting aside of the respondents' order dated 15.2.2005 (Annexure A-l) insofar as it rejects his claim for protection of pay consequent upon his appointment as Assistant Teacher in the Railway Department. He has also sought a direction to the respondents to re-fix his pay w.e.f. 22.01.1993, Le.from the date of his appointment as Assistant Teacher, after protecting his pay of previous service rendered by him on the post of Permanent Way Mistry (PWM, for short), with all consequential benefits including the arrears of pay.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed in the year 1988 as PWM in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 in the Northern Railway, Moradabad Division. In the year 1991 the Railway Recruitment Board, Allahabad, invited applications for the post of Assistant Teacher in Railway Schools in the pay scale of Rs. 1200-2040.The applicant applied for the post through proper channel after obtaini...

Jawahir Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow

Reported in: (2007)(3)SLJ358CAT

1. O.A. 604/2001 has been filed by the applicant Jawahir (address given in the notice) against the order of his removal from service dated 15.11.97 passed by Assistant Engineer-1st, Northern Railway Charbagh, Running Shed Lucknow.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as a Gang Man on 15.12.1977 by Divisional Regional Manager, Hazratganj Lucknow after passing trade tests as prescribed under the rules. On one afternoon, when the applicant was discharging his duties under an open sky, he fell a victim to the scorching rays of the sun as a result of which he suffered a serious stroke of a mental ailment known as 'Psychosis' in medical terminology. As a result of this deterioration in his mental condition, the applicant suddenly left his house in the night of 28.7.1992 and reached Ranchi possibly with the objective of treatment of his mental ailment in a reputed mental Hospital, located there. While he was wandering on the streets of the city some people took pity...

Chandra Nigam (Mrs.) Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow

Reported in: (2008)(2)SLJ82CAT

1. Original Application No. 519 of 2005 has been filed by the applicant Mrs. Chandra Nigam (address given in the O. A.) against non-consideration of her case for promotion to the Indian Administrative Service (I. A.S.) Cadre for which, according to her she was suitable to be considered.2. The applicant submits that after having been declared successful in the U.P. Civil Service (Executive Branch) Examinations conducted by the U.P. Public Service Commission in the year 1973, she was appointed as Dy. Collector (Trainee) and posted at Allahabad vide order dated 15.5.1974 and she remained posted their upto 15.7.1978. She was confirmed in the Provincial Civil Service w.e.f. 1.7.1976 vide order dated 1.7.1976 of the State Government. Thereafter, the applicant was transferred and posted in different capacities such as Dy.Administrator, Khadi and Village Industry Board, Secretary/Additional Secretary, Kanpur Development Authority, Additional District Magistrate, Kanpur, General Manager, Handl...

Sri. S.R. Pavana Murthy S/O Late Vs. Union of India (Uoi), to Be

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT

1. These two cases have come up before this Full Bench on a reference made by the Hon'ble Chairman under Section 5(4)(d) of the Administrative Tribunal's Act, 1985 when a Division Bench of this Tribunal which heard the matters noted conflicting decisions in respect of the controversy involved in these two cases and the same was brought to the notice of the Hon'ble Chairman. The question referred are: 1. Whether this Tribunal is bound by the judgment as rendered by the Delhi High Court in S.C. Parasher case (C.W. No. 678/2003) as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme Court by dismissing Union of India's SLP as well as order of this Bench in H.L. Nagaraja and Anr. v. Union of India as upheld by Karnataka High Court or we are bound by the Full Bench judgment rendered in batch case O.A. Nos. 504/2004 decided on 29-04.2005 S.R. Rajagopal and Ors. v. The Defence Pension Disbursing Officer and Ors. as well as T.R. Viswanathan and Ors. v. Union of India, dismissed on 8th June, 2005. 2. More specifica...

Sri Rakesh Kumar Mathur Son of Late Vs. the Union of India (Uoi) Throu ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. The dispute involved in this OA is whether the applicant who was recruited through the Railway Recruitment Board for the post of Apprentice Mechanic. He was selected by the Railway Recruitment Board through an examination conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board in the year 1983. On 12.04.1985 he completed his probation. However, the respondents did not issue him the appointment letter.2. The two private respondent No. 4 and 5 however, were recruited for the same post by the departmental selection. They were previously working with the respondents as regular employee and in 1984 they were selected for the post of mechanic. Thereafter they underwent training for fifteen months and completed the same on 09.05.1985. The private respondent No. 4 and 5 however, were offered appointment letter on 18.05.2005 and the applicant was offered appointment letter on 24.05.2005. For the reasons all the applicant join six days after the date of joining of the private respondents he was treated j...

Ram Pujan Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna

Reported in: (2008)(2)SLJ74CAT

1. The applicant who was working under the respondents as Attendant-cum-Cook in Food and Nutrition Board at Ranehi has come up before this Tribunal for quashing Annexures-A/and A/13, the former being the order of the Disciplinary Authority (one R.N. Chakravorty, Dy. Technical Advisor) dated 31.07.1985, on consideration of the inquiry report in which the charge was found to be proved, punishing the applicant/proceedee with removal from service, and the latter being the order of the Appellate Authority recorded on re-consideration of the matter, in compliance of the direction of this Tribunal recorded in O.A. 616 of 1997, dated 07.10.2004, (i) Annexure-A/3 is order by the Disciplinary Authority (Shri R.N. Chakravorty) dated 26.11.1984 placing the applicant under suspension in contemplation of a departmental proceeding against him, with immediate effect. (ii) Annexure-A/4, dated 05.12.1984 is a memorandum of charges against the applicant under signature of the same Disciplinary Authority...

H. Nataraj S/O Honnaiah Vs. the Govt. of India, Rep. by Its

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT

1. The applicant who is working as a Daftry under the 3rd respondent has filed this OA seeking the following reliefs: 1606/8836/LA/(Civ.) dated 28.1.2006 (Ann. A-4) of the Admn. Officer, endorsement dt. 2.5.2006 nearing No. 1606/8836/LA(Civ.) (Ann. A-5) also signed by the Admn. Officer for Commanding Officer and the letter dt. 19.7.2006 bearing No. 79235/complaint/Q/ST/12(Civ.) of the 2nd respondent (vide Ann. A-9) with further directions directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the cadre of LDC as against 10% quota available for eligible group-D employees as per recruitment rules (Ann. A-1) with all consequential benefits, in the interest of justice and equity; ii) Pass such other orders just and expedient in the circumstances of the case including the award of costs, in the interest of justice and equity.2. The applicant had joined the service under the respondents as a Peon w.e.f. 4.7.1988. He acquired B.Com degree from the Bangalore Universi...