Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court July 2007 Judgments

Smt. Lalita Wife of Late Lalit Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Allahabad

1. In this O.A, the application No. 1 is seeking direction to the respondents for appointment on compassionate grounds in favour of applicant No. 2.2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant No. 1 is widow of Late Lilit Kumar Singh and the applicant No. 2 said to be adopted son of applicant No. 1. The husband of the applicant No. 1 was appointed in the Railways on 04.10.1964 and he died on 12.10.1989 while in service.Admittedly, the deceased has not left any legal heir. Thereafter, the applicant No. 1 made a request for appointment on compassionate grounds in favor of applicant No. 2. Earlier it is stated that the applicant No. 2 shall be taken in to consideration as Nephew of the applicant No.1 and subsequently it is stated that the applicant no. 2 to be treated and accepted as adopted son. Later on it is stated that the applicant No. 2 is adopted son of applicant No. 1. Based on these facts, the applicant No. 1 is making request to the respondents authorities for appointment ...

Amal Chandra Paul S/O Sri. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), by

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT

1. The applicant, a Junior Hindi Translator in the Small Industries Organisation, Kolkata was transferred to Small Industries Institution, Bangalore as per order dated 6-9-2006 (Annexure A1). He has challenged the said order before the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in OA No.1036/2006, which by order dated 8-12-2006 had dismissed the said OA.However, in para-6 of the said order it was observed as follows: In the last the applicant's counsel has pointed out that the applicant has already carried out the transfer and he has joined at Bangalore. After joining at Bangalore he has filed a representation before the respondent No. 2 for his transfer to Kolkata. In this connection it is open for the respondents to decide the representation filed by the applicant regarding his transfer to Kolkata. The observation made by us in the body of this order will not prejudice in deciding the representation.A copy of the representation mentioned in the order is produced as Annexure A5 in this OA.2. In t...

Jada Vasantha Rao and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), General

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. The subject matter of challenge and the relief claimed in all the OAs being same they are being disposed of by the following order: The applicant in OA 561/2006 is presently working in the Commercial cadre of Vijayawada division of South Central Railway. While he was working as Head Commercial Clerk at Vijayawada Railway Station was informed by proceedings dated 16.2.2006 that he is responsible for the error sheet debit of Rs. 18,641/- on account of Self Printing Ticket Machine (SPTM) debits at Vijayawada Railway Station raised by the Traffic Accounts and as such a decision was taken to realise the debit amount from the salary of the applicant and the applicant was advised to submit his representation if any against the said recovery. Accordingly, the applicant submitted his representation to the 3rd respondent herein wherein he has denied his responsibility for the raised debit as mentioned therein and disagreed for the recovery of the said amount. The applicant in his representat...

Shri A.A. Laxma Reddy S/O A. Ganga Vs. Commissioner, Customs and

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. This is an application filed seeking to set aside the memorandum of charge dated 28.10.2005 issued by R-2, Joint Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise. The relevant facts in brief are as follows: The applicant joined in service as Inspector of Customs and Central Excise on 27.8.93. While he was Inspector, Central Excise at Sircilla in Karimnagar District, the CBI, Hyderabad Branch registered a crime against him on 7.5.2002 in RC No. 22 (A) of 2002 under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 for the alleged offence of demand and acceptance of bribe by the applicant from one B. Ramaswamy. The CBI laid a trap and later filed charge sheet on 30.9.2002 against the applicant and also against one private person by name, Ch. Ravinder alleging offences punishable under Section 120-B of IPC and 7 and 13 (2) read with 13 (I)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act in the Court of Special Judge for CBI cases, Hyderabad. The said case was numbered as CC 33/2002 on the file of the Specia...

Shri V. Balaji S/O Anjaneyulu Vs. the Chief Postmaster General and

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. This is an application filed seeking to call for records pertaining to the notification No. B3/54 dated 31.7.2003 of the third respondent reserving the post of GDS/BPM, Devalampeta Branch Office for OBC candidates and to declare the inaction to act on the said notification and for also to cancel the fresh notification No. B3/54 dated 22.6.2006 reserving the post for SC candidates, declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted, misconceived and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India. The applicant is a resident of Devalampeta village and he belongs to the category of OBC. He is a graduate and he obtained 78.6% marks in SSC and later he passed Intermediate and also Degree. He registered himself with Employment Exchange. On 10.5.2003 a BPM's post in Devalampeta Branch Office became vacant as the incumbent retired after attaining the age of 65 years. The said vacancy was notified by R-3 under Notification No. B3/54 dated 31.7.2003. To fill up the said v...

Smt. P. Aruna Rajeshwar W/O Late Vs. the South Central Railway, Rep. b ...

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. Heard Shri Gopal Rao on behalf of Shri G.Vidya Sagar, learned Counsel for the applicant and Smt. A.P. Lakshmi, learned Counsel for the respondents. None appeared for the 3rd respondent.2. The applicant has filed this OA with a prayer for declaring the proceedings dated 28.6.2004 and 16.9.2004 as illegal and to declare that the date of select list for the purpose of preparation of combined seniority list of Personnel Inspectors Grade-II is contrary to IREM provisions and to declare the applicant as senior to the 3rd respondent by duly taking into consideration the date of entry into the cadre in the pay scale of Rs. 5500-9000 for the purpose of seniority.3. The brief facts of the case here are that the applicant herein joined the South Central Railway as Senior Clerk on 1.3.1989 and was appointed by transfer as Personnel Inspector Grade-III by Order dated 5.12.1994. Thereafter, she got further up gradation as Personnel Inspector Grade-II with effect from 10.12.1996 and was further e...

Abdul Subhan S/O Sk. Dasthagiri Vs. the Divisional Railway Manager,

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. The issue that is raised in this OA lies on a very narrow compass i.e., whether the applicant is entitled to the running allowance of 120 KM per day even though he was decategorized medically as on 20.5.2003.The applicant's prayer is that though his pay has been re-fixed in terms of the Railway Board's Circular, the respondents have already recovered Rs. 32,916/-, which according to him, should be refunded to him as in his view he is entitled to the running allowance even after re-fixation of the pay as done by the respondents.2. The applicant's case is that he was working as Senior Goods Driver in the scale of Rs. 5500-9000/- in Guntakal Depot of Guntakal Division of South Central Railway. On 5.12.2002, he fell sick and was admitted in the Railway Hospital at Guntakal. During the sickness period, the applicant was medically examined and found unfit by the Railway Hospital for A-I category i.e., unfit to work as Driver. The respondents had posted him as Driver on special duty as Cr...

N.V. Sastry S/O N. Suryanarayana Vs. the Superintendent of Post

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. The issue that arises for consideration in this OA is on a very short compass i.e. Whether the applicant is eligible for selection and appointment as a Postman/Group 'D' against the vacancies that arose under 25% seniority quota for the years 2003 and 2004, he being the senior most eligible GDS employee in the Division inspite of the fact that he has crossed 50 years of age as on 1.7.2006.2. The applicant's case is that he was born on 1.8.1955 and belongs to OC Community and having passed SSC examination, he joined as EDMC of Jeelakarragudem BO under Kamavarapukota SO in Eluru Division in May, 1976, (since redesignated as GDS MC). As per the Divisional seniority list of GDS circulated as on 1.7.2001 vide proceedings No.B2/GDS/SL/2005 dated 6.7.2005 the applicant is shown at Sl. No. 34 of the list; since all his seniors have either already been appointed as Postman or otherwise become age barred having crossed 50 years, he happens to be the senior most GDS in the Division, eligible ...

Madhusudan Ram Sahu Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ranchi

Reported in: (2008)(1)SLJ37CAT

1. The applicant having faced a departmental proceeding and awarded punishment of compulsory retirement, has essentially come in this original application for reduction of his punishment as was directed by this Tribunal in different original applications filed on the subject.2. In order to appreciate the contentions of the applicant, it will be trite to look at the background facts, as below: (i) The applicant had come up against the punishment awarded in the disciplinary proceedings in O.A. No. 227/1996 which was disposed of by order dated 15.12.2000 (Annexure A/3). Considering all the points, while finding no flaw in holding the disciplinary proceeding, this Tribunal also considered the question of quantum of punishment. The then Hon'ble Vice-Chairman and Hon'ble Member (A) were of the opinion that the punishment of compulsory retirement was on the higher side. A direction was issued to the Appellate Authority to consider the matter afresh regarding quantum of punishment. (ii) The o...

J. Simhachalam, Chemical Vs. South Central Railway Rep. by Its

Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad

1. This application has been filed by the applicant for a direction to the respondents to correct his date of birth as 15.8.1954 instead of 10.5.1952 in the service record of the applicant as per date of birth extract and judgment in OS No. 1008/1977 dated 3.12.1977 by quashing the impugned letter No. GR/P.535/4/ 3/CMT/ Vol. I datd 31.1.2006 issued by the 3rd respondent.2. The applicant who was born at Palakonda, Kaikalur Taluk, Krishna District passed the SSC examination and as per the date of birth entry in SSC certificate, his date of birth is 10.5.1952. The applicant has done his M.Sc. (Chemistry) from K.N. Govt. P.G. College, Gyanpur, Waranasi District. The applicant applied for the post of Junior Clerk through Railway Service Commission and during the same time he has also filed O.S. No. 1008/1977 for correction of date of birth with the Andhra University. The applicant was selected as Junior Clerk through Railway Service Commission and was appointed on 24.2.1978. In the service...