Central Administrative Tribunal Cat Court April 2009 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.
D. Prisekutty Vs. Assistant General Manager Bsnl, Chengannur Alapuzha ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-28-2009
Hon'ble Mrs. K. Noorjehan, Administrative Member The applicant is challenging Ext. P-13 notice dated 3.1.2007 and Ext. P-1 order dated 4.4.200 rejecting his claim for pay and allowances on reinstatement. 2. The applicant, a Telecom Mechanic was proceeded against by way of disciplinary action on the ground that he had been habitually indebted and that he did not inform about one month's civil imprisonment he had undergone as a consequence of a court decree. Consequently, he was compulsorily retired from service w.e.f. 31.12.2003. The applicant challenged the punishment order before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala through WP(C) 2194 of 2006 which was allowed by Single Bench, quashed the punishment order with a direction to the respondents to reinstate the applicant in service forthwith with all service benefits. The respondents Department challenged the judgment in W.A No. 1379 of 2006 which was disposed of by the Division Bench of the High Court by its judgment dated 28.7.2006 which ...
Md. Abdulla Ankush Vs. the General Manager, South Central Railways, Ra ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-27-2009
ORAL ORDER {As per Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.Lakshmana Reddy, Vice Chairman } Heard Mr.Ch.Satyanarayana, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.D.Madhava Reddy, learned standing counsel for the respondents. We have perused the application and documents filed along with the application and also the reply filed by the respondents. 2. As seen from the relief prayed for by the applicant he sought for a direction to declare the inaction on the part of the respondents in not disposing of the representations dated 24.12.2006 and 31.01.2008 as arbitrary, illegal and for a consequential direction to the respondents to release the 300 days of EOL and refund of damage rent. 3. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the respondents have already given reply in the form of Annexure - 1 as long back as on 11.12.2006. As the applicant submitted representations subsequent to 11.12.2006 aggrieved by the orders dated 11.12.2006, we are of the considered view that the respondents are expected t...
N. Sasidharan, Deputy Commissioner of Customs, Thiruvananthapuram Vs. ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-23-2009
Hon'ble Dr. K B S Rajan, Judicial Member The applicant functioning as Deputy Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs has been transferred from Air Cargo Complex Trivandrum to Central Excise Trivandrum Division vide Annexure A-3 and on the strength of the same stood relieved vide Annexure A-4. On the grounds as enumerated below, the applicant has challenged the aforesaid transfer/relieving orders: (A) Annexure A-3 and consequence are bad in law and are liable to be set aside; (B) The applicant was posted, at the post he was holding, 8 months back. But he is transferred out from there illegally before the tenure period without any valid reason. This is patently illegal, arbitrary, unjust and liable to be set aside. (C) The applicant cannot be posted out of Air Cargo Complex, Trivandrum, before completing the tenure period unless if there is any emergency administrative exigency. But no such reason is given in Annexure A3. This is clear injustice done to the applicant with malafide i...
S. Brahmaiah Vs. General Manager (Rep. Uoi), South Central Railway and ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-23-2009
ORAL ORDER: {As per Hon'ble Mr. Justice P.Lakshmana Reddy, Vice Chairman } Heard Mr.S.Ramakrishna Rao, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.M.C.Jacob, learned standing counsel for the respondents. 2. The applicant filed this application to call for the records pertaining to the appointments of the applicant as CandW Khalasi in the scale of Rs.196-232 under the Chief Train Examiner, Guntur vide order dated 26.04.1977 of Divisional Personnel Officer, S.C.Railway, Vijayawada and as Khalasi in Wagon Work Shop, SC Railway, Guntupalli under 25% quota of ITI qualified candidates vide order dated 10.04.1981 of the Deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer, Wagon Work Shop, SC Railway, Guntupalli and to declare the inaction of the 4th respondent to count the total service rendered by the applicant in both the spells as continuous service counting the total seniority from 28.04.1977 including the service rendered in Guntupalli Workshop w.e.f. 10.04.1981 and to consider further promotions on that bas...
K. Balachandran Vs. Union of India Represented by Comptroller Andaudit ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-23-2009
Hon'ble Dr K.B.S. Rajan, Judicial Member When a transfer is made or is refused against the wishes of an employee, resort to judicial interference is made. The Tribunal within the jurisdiction available has to consider the grievance and arrive at a judicious decision. In the instant case, refusal to transfer the applicant to Trissur, the choice place of the applicant is the grievance of the applicant. 2. Brief facts of the case as contained in the O.A. are as under: (a) An understanding was arrived at as early as in 1972 when the Thrissur Branch Office of the respondents was constituted and based on the said understanding, it was decided that transfer to that branch would be made from amongst volunteers and posting would be based on seniority position (Annexure A-1 refers). On the strength of the above agreement and introducing certain other aspects of transfer, a transfer policy was issued vide order dated 1.2.1999 at Annexure A-2. In the list of volunteers prepared on branchwise, the...
A. Vijayalakshmi and Another Vs. Union of India Represented by the Gen ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-22-2009
Hon'ble Mr. George Paracken, Judicial Member The 1st applicant herein is the second widow of late Shri K.B.Shashankan who died while in service on 25.9.1991 and the 2nd applicant is the daughter of the 1st applicant. The 4th respondent is the 1st wife of late Shri K.B.Shashankan and the 5th respondent is their daughter. The 4th respondent was the recipient of the family pension after the demise of Shri Shashankan. She also got the appointment as a Gangwoman with the Railways on compassionate grounds. When she got re-married on 20.8.1999, the official respondents stopped the payment of family pension to her and started paying to the 5th respondent till 13.6.2007 i.e. when the claim of the 2nd applicant for 50% of the family pension was allowed. The relief sought in this O.A is to declare that the 2nd applicant is entitled to grant 50% of family pension with effect from 20.8.1999 i.e. the date of re-marriage of the 4th respondent and also to direct the respondents to pay the 2nd applica...
N Sasidharan Vs. the Indian Council of Agriculture Research and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-22-2009
Mr. George Paracken, Judicial Member The applicant is aggrieved by the Annexure A-4 order dated 16.3.2009 by which he has been temporarily transferred to Central Plantation and Crops Research Institute (CPCRI for short), Regional Station Minicoy for a period not exceeding three months, as on tour. He is also aggrieved by the Annexure A-6 order dated 8.4.2009 by which he has been relieved from his duties with effect from 20.4.2009 with the direction to him to report for duty at CPCRI, Minicoy in terms of the aforesaid transfer order dated 16.3.2009. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the earlier also the applicant was temporarily transferred to CPCRI Station, Minicoy for a period not exceeding 180 days as on tour vide Annexure A-1 order dated 30.4.2008. He made the Annexure A-2 representation at that time stating that he is 58 years old and he has several health problems like breathing and asthmatic troubles. It has also been stated that he was advised to keep away from coastal ...
Shri E. Radha Krishnan Vs. Chief Personnel Officer South Central Railw ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
R. Santhanam, Member (Admn.) This application has been filed challenging the order of the Chief Personnel Officer, South Central Railway (Respondent No. 1), in letter No. P/ Stores/Misc.Vol.III dated 9.12.2004 rejecting the applicant's request for pay protection. 2. The applicant was originally appointed as Material Checker in the scale of Rs.105 135 on 8.2.61 in DBK Railway, Waltair and was promoted as Clerk on 19.12.62 in the scale of Rs.110 180, as Senior Clerk on 1.2.64 in the scale of Rs.130 300 and Ward Keeper on 26.10.66 in the scale of Rs.210 320. Consequent on completion of construction work in the DBK Railway, the staff of the construction department were rendered surplus and they were deployed to other Railways including the South Central Railway for absorption against the existing vacancies. The applicant was appointed as a Junior Clerk in the scale of Rs.110 180 on 1.4.67 notwithstanding the fact that he was in the higher grade as Ward Keeper in the scale of Rs.210 320 an...
K. Kunhikrishnan Vs. Union of India Represented by the Secretary, New ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
Hon'ble Mrs. K. Noorjehan, Administrative Member The applicant challenges Annexure A-1 order dated 20.9.2006 imposing the penalty of withholding of 10% of the monthly pension and witholding of retiral benefits. 2. The applicant entered the service of the Doordarshan as Group-A Officer in 1977 and retired as Deputy Director General in 2004. After retirement from service he was imposed with a punishment of withholding of 10% of the monthly pension for a period of two years. While the applicant was working as the Deputy Director General disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 were initiated by OM dated 28.11.2003 on the following Article of Charges: ARTICLE-I Shri K. Kunhikrishnan while functioning as Deputy Director General (CandS) along with the Deputy Director General (Finance) processed the proposals dated 20.9.99 and 29.11.99 from M/s Rainbow Productions Pvt. Ltd. and approved increase in the duration and periodicity of the programme "KHAS KHABOR" on DD-...
K.Jayakumar, Appraiser, Custom House, Kochi Vs. Union of India Represe ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Decided on: Apr-21-2009
Hon'ble Mr.George Paracken, Judicial Member The applicant is presently working as Appraiser in the Custom House, Kochi. He has filed this O.A against the Annexure A-5 order of the 2nd respondent dated 29.9.2008 rejecting his request to cancel the order No.187/06 dated 5.6.2006 transferring him to Mangalore. 2. In this matter the applicant had earlier filed O.A.511/06 and R.A.31/06 before this Tribunal and W.P.(C) 30178/06 before the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala. The Hon'ble High Court vide judgment dated 6.3.2008 had directed the 2nd respondent to consider the request of the applicant to continue him at Cochin office on filing a representation to that effect. Pursuant to the aforesaid direction, the applicant filed Annexure A-4 representation dated 31.3.2008 to the 2nd respondent but the 2nd respondent rejected the same vide the impugned Annexure A-5 order dated 29.9.2008. Hence he has filed this O.A before this Tribunal. 3. When the matter came up for hearing today, counsel for the...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›
- Last »