Delhi Court November 2011 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.
Harpal Singh Vs. Union of India Through Secretary to the Ministry, New ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
DR. A.K. MISHRA, MEMBER (A) 1. The applicant has filed this O.A. challenging the order dated 21.01.2004 by which his contention to consider his seniority as LDC on All India basis was rejected. The prayer in the application is to set aside this order, direct the respondents to promote the applicant to the grade of UDC w.e.f. the date his junior in the Southern Command had been promoted and further promote him to the grade of Asstt. from the date his immediate junior in Southern Command was promoted and for also a direction to grant all financial and consequential benefits. 1.1 The O.A. was dismissed in the order dated 21.12.2004 of this Tribunal on the ground that seniority list for LDC was being maintained Command wise and promotion to the post of UDC was being given accordingly. Since no one junior to the applicant in his own Command had been promoted ignoring his claim the O.A. was dismissed as the applicant did not show any rules which stipulated maintenance of All India seniority ...
Smt. Suja Paul and Others Vs. the Chief Secretary, Government of Nct o ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
DR. A.K. MISHRA, MEMBER (A) 1. This application (OA-2403/2010) has been made challenging the Memorandum dated 09.07.2010 of the respondent authority by which the applicant was directed to deposit the over payment made to him in respect of the period of 01.01.1996 to 30.04.1998. Since the cause of action in respect of OA-2404/2010 is also same, both the cases have been heard together. The present order will, mutatis mutandis, apply to OA-2404/2010. 2. The applicants were working as Laboratory Technicians (LTs) in AandU Tibbia College, New Delhi which was taken over by the Government of NCT, Delhi by enacting the Takeover Act, 1998 which came into effect on 01.05.1998. The respondent authorities had passed an order on 08.10.2007 granting the benefits of revised pay scale on account of implementation of the recommendation of the 5th Central Pay Commission w.e.f. 01.01.1996. But, this order was not implemented for the applicants on the ground that the concurrence of the Department of Finan...
Smt. Kamlesh Srivastava (Tgt-hindi) and Others Vs. Government of Nct o ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
Hon’ble Shri George Paracken: 1. The applicants are Trained Graduate Teachers (TGTs) working under the Directorate of Education, Government of NCT of Delhi. Earlier they have approached this Tribunal vide OA No.82/2010 and OA-611/2010. Applicants in OA-82/2010 were granted the ACP benefits but the same was withdrawn vide order dated 16.12.2009 and ordered for recovery. Vide order dated 31.1.2010 this Tribunal stayed the recovery. The case of the applicants in those OAs was that the recruitment rules do not put any hurdle in grant of ACP benefits to them and they have relied on the judgments of the High Court of Delhi in Apinder Kaur Vs. Delhi Administration and others, 92 (2001) DLT 294 and the Apex Court in D.S.Nakara and others Vs. Union of India, 1983 SCC (LandS) 145. This Tribunal vide order dated 9.9.2010 finally disposed of those original applications with a direction to the respondents to consider their claim in the light of the aforesaid decisions and pass a speaking orde...
Chand Roop Gahlot and Others Vs. Government of Nct of Delhithrough Its ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
Hon’ble Shri George Paracken: 1. This is the second round of litigation by the applicants. Earlier they have approached this Tribunal vide OA-3161/2009 as they were denied the re-employment after their retirement at the age of 60 years on 30.4.2009, 30.6.2009, 31.1.2009, 31.5.2009 and 31.10.2008 respectively. The contention of the respondent department, namely, Directorate of Social Welfare and Woman Child Development was that they were not automatically following the guidelines as laid down by the Education Department of the Government of NCT of Delhi regarding re-employment of retired teachers. However, this Tribunal has held that the notification issued in this regard by the Lt. Governor on 4.9.2006 includes a policy of re-employment in respect of Directorate of Social Welfare also. Accordingly, vide order dated 19.2.2010, the respondents were directed to extend the benefit of the decision of the Lt. Governor’s notification dated 4.9.2006 to the applicants by extending t...
Medical Superintendent, Deen Dayal Upadhyaya Hospital, New Delhi and A ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
DR. VEENA CHHOTRAY: 1. RA 204/2011 has been filed by the Respondents in the OA seeking a review of this Tribunal’s order dated 8.2.2011 passed in the OA 95/2010. In response to the notice in the RA, a counter reply has been filed on behalf of the original applicant, opposing the RA. The present order is being passed after hearing the learned counsels, Shri Vijay Kumar Pandita and Shri Rajesh Kaushik, appearing respectively for the Review Applicants and the Respondent. 2. The Review Application being filed on 5.7.2011 is beyond the stipulated time limit of 30 days as prescribed under the CAT (Procedure) Rule 17 (1) read with Section 22 (3) (f) of the AT Act. However, it has been enclosed with an MA No.1701/2011 praying for condonation of delay in filing the RA. As the reasons, it has been stated that the copy of the order of the Tribunal was received unofficially from the son of the applicant on 3.3.2011. The further time taken is mentioned as owing to processing of the matter at ...
Sh. Jagdish Chand Goyal Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through the Chief Se ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
DR. A.K. MISHRA, MEMBER (A) 1. The applicant retired on 31.03.2010 as a Post Graduate Teacher (PGT) under the respondents. He submitted his papers for his re-employment for two years to the Principal of the School wherefrom he retired as per the Scheme of the Delhi Government. He made a representation again on 30.04.2010 to the Dy. Director Education, North East District, Yamuna Vihar, Delhi for his re-employment. When there was no response, he filed a complaint on 08.06.2010 before the Public Grievances Commission of Delhi Government. The respondent authority took the plea that his case was not recommended by the Head of the School whose report on his work and conduct was not satisfactory; besides the medical report issued by Dr. S.C. Parakh of Sant Parmanad Hospital was not in favour of the applicant. However, the Principal of the School submitted to the Commission that the applicant may be referred to any Government hospital for further examination. Accordingly, he was referred to G...
S.K. Srivastava Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, New Delhi and Ot ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Nov-14-2011
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER (A): MA No.1650/2011 1. The instant OA was filed by the applicant during the vacation of the Tribunal when interim relief sought by him in the MA No.1650/2011 to grant ex-parte stay of the order dated 29.6.2011 was pressed to be considered for which a Special Bench was constituted on 30.6.2011 and on consideration of the same it was noticed that the relief sought in the OA and MA being same, the best course was to refer the matter to the Division Bench for adjudication as notices in OA were already issued to the respondents on 21.6.2011. When the case came up on 04.7.2011 the matter was considered and we ordered that “instead of disposing of the MA No. 1650/2011, we deem it more appropriate to dispose of the OA itself.” OA No.2238/2011 2. The applicant, who is an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) Officer of 1987 batch is aggrieved by the order 3/2011 dated 16.06.2011 by which all litigation cases relating to the applicant have been transferred to...
Shree Hazur Baba Sadhu Singh Ji. Vs. Union of India and ors.
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-2011
1. Two distinct issues arise for consideration in the above-captioned appeals. The first pertains to lands comprised in Khasra Nos.16, 18, 24, 26, 27, 39, 40, 41, and 142 Village Neb Sarai and the other issue pertains to lands comprised in Khasra Nos.223 and 224 Village Chattarpur.2. The factual commonality in all the appeals is unauthorized colonization on said lands.3. The appellants lost the battle before the learned Single Judge and live on to fight a second round before the Appellate Court.4. The basis of the right claimed by the appellants is the policy decision dated 24th March 2008 notified by the Government of NCT Delhi pertaining to 'Regularization of Unauthorized Colonies in Delhi'.5. The notification dated 24th March 2008 specifies the criteria for regularization of unauthorized colonies and vide clause 3.3(a) specifically excludes such unauthorized colonies or part of colonies or habitations comprised in notified or reserved forest area.6. Lands comprised in Khasra Nos.16,...
Sh. Harvinder Singh Vs. Sh. Suresh Kumar Tehri
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-2011
1. The challenge by means of this Regular First Appeal under Section 96 of Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 (CPC) is to the impugned judgment of the trial Court dated 18.3.2011. By the impugned judgment, the trial Court decreed the suit for specific performance filed by the respondent/plaintiff with respect to the subject/suit property being flat No.J- 2/100A, DDA Flats, Kalkaji, New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the "suit/subject property").2. The facts of the case are that an agreement to sell and purchase was executed on 27.9.2004 between the parties, the respondent/plaintiff being the prospective purchaser and the appellant/defendant being the prospective seller. The total sale consideration fixed for sale of the suit property was Rs. 6 lacs and out of which a sum of Rs.1,15,000/- was paid to the appellant/defendant as advance money. The balance sale consideration of Rs.4,85,000/- was agreed to be paid on or before 31.3.2005 at the time of execution of the sale deed and handing ov...
Super Cassettes Industries Ltd. Vs. Mr Chintamani Rao and ors
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Nov-11-2011
1. By this order I propose to dispose of the aforesaid interim applications preferred under Order 39 Rules 1 & 2 CPC in the three suits mentioned above.Introduction2. CS(OS) 2282/2006 has been filed by Super Cassettes Industries Limited (hereinafter referred to as ‘Super Cassettes’), which is engaged in the business of producing and marketing of audio cassettes, video cassettes, compact discs, televisions, CD players etc., The plaintiff is the proprietor of the T-series brand of music cassettes and CDs. The plaintiff claims copyright in cinematographic films and sound recordings in a large number of literary, musical and cinematographic works. The plaintiff claims that it gives licenses to other broadcasting organizations for use of the works in which it has copyright. The defendants in the suit are Shri Chintamani Rao, the Chief Executive Officer of defendant no.3 Independent News Services Pvt. Ltd. (India TV for short). Defendant no.2 Shri Rajat Sharma is the Chairman...
- ‹ Prev
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- Next ›
- Last »