Delhi Court March 2012 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.
Manu Tentiwal and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER (A) 1. Six applicants who are direct recruits of Indian Revenue Service (IRS) appointed on 01.09.2003, have joined together in the present OA, having been aggrieved by the action of the official respondents in promoting the promotee category of ITS officers to the grade of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (JCIT in short) and claiming that they are senior to the said promotees, and have, therefore, approached the Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, with the following prayers:- “(i) Declare that all Direct Recruits appointed on 01.09.2003 are entitled to promotion prior to promotees appointed on 05.12.2003 and further direct the Respondents to take all necessary steps pursuant and in furtherance thereof. (ii) In the alternative, call for the records pertaining to the Screening Committee (DPC) meeting dated 17/18.10.2011 held under the aegis of the Department of Revenue and all orders/circulars/communications issued p...
Raghuraj Singh Vs. Delhi Police Through Commissioner of Police, Police ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Sequel to a departmental enquiry, Raghuraj Singh, an ASI in Delhi Police, the applicant herein, has been visited with the penalty of withholding/forfeiture of two year’s annual increment with cumulative effect, vide order dated 15.01.2011 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police, North East District, Delhi, the disciplinary authority. The order aforesaid, in an appeal preferred by the applicant against the same, has since been confirmed vide order dated 14.06.2011 passed by Special Commissioner of Police, New Delhi Range, the appellate authority. These are the two orders which have been challenged in this Original Application filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 2. Inasmuch as, the procedure adopted by the respondents in inflicting punishment upon the applicant would be in violation of rules as also principles of natural justice, and, therefore, while setting aside the impugned orders, the matter has to be remit...
Sunil Chandra Vs. Commissioner of Police and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. The candidature of Sunil Chandra, the applicant herein, for the post of SI (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police, has since been cancelled vide order dated 16.06.2011, for his involvement in a criminal case u/s 394/411/34 IPC pertaining to FIR No.345/99, PS Paschim Vihar, Delhi, in which he was admittedly acquitted on 07.09.2010. It is this order which is under challenge in this Original Application filed by him under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 2. Brief facts of the case culminating into filing of the present OA reveal that the applicant applied for the post of SI (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police during the recruitment held in the year 2009 (Phase-II) against open SC category, and was selected provisionally, subject to verification of character and antecedents etc. The applicant had disclosed while filling in the required forms that a criminal case pertaining to the FIR aforesaid was pending against him. The said case, it is the case of the applicant...
Raj Kumar Jha and Another Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER (A): 1. Shri Rajkumar Jha and another officer belonging to the DANIPS have joined together in the present OA filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and prayed the following relief (s): “(i) The Respondent No.1 should be directed to give seniority of year 1997 to the applicants in IPS as per provisions in IPS (Pay) Rules, 2007 and IPS (Recruitment) Rules, 1954. (ii) The Respondent No.1 and Respondent No.3 should be directed to hold regular DPC for JAG-II and JAG-I in DANILDDNHPS and regularize the ad hoc promotions of applicants in JAG-II and JAG-I. (iii) The Respondent No.1 should be restrained from seeking undertaking of the applicants with regard to unconditional willingness for promotion to IPS and termination of lien in their present service after their substantive appointment to IPS till the issues raised in this OA are resolved. (iv) The Respondent No.1 should be directed to keep the Select List (prepared for promot...
Kamlesh Meena Vs. Commissioner of Police, Police Headquarters, Ip Esta ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
Justice V. K. Bali, Chairman: Candidature of Kamlesh Meena, the applicant herein, for the post of Constable (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police has been cancelled vide order dated 20.12.2010. It is this order which is under challenge in the present Original Application filed by him under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 2. Brief facts of the case as projected in the pleadings of the parties and accompanying documents reveal that the respondents initiated recruitment to the post of Constable (Exe.) Male for the year 2009-10. Whereas, the applicant cleared all the tests, in the medical examination he was found unfit due to ‘coronal hypospadius with cardoe’. It is the case of the applicant that the medical problem as mentioned above is temporary and can be rectified by undergoing minor corrective surgery, which, of course, he has since undergone. When asked by the respondents as to whether he would like to challenge the findings of the medical board, the applicant...
Jorawar Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Jorawar Singh, a Sub Inspector (Exe.) in Delhi Police, has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, primarily praying that the adverse remarks contained in his ACR for the period 01.04.1999 to 19.12.1999 be expunged, and in consequence thereof, to direct the respondents to conduct review DPC to consider his promotion with effect from the date his juniors have been promoted, with all consequential benefits. 2. The undisputed facts as may emanate from the pleadings of parties and the accompanying documents for the twin reliefs as mentioned above, reveal that that the applicant was appointed as Sub-Inspector (Exe.) in Delhi Police in the year 1985. It is his case that he was falsely implicated in a corruption case vide FIR No.46/99 under the provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, PS A.C. Branch, and was placed under suspension vide order dated 20.12.1999. His ACR for the period 01.04.1999 to 19.12.1999 con...
Dinesh Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Police and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Dinesh Kumar, the applicant herein, was provisionally selected on the post of Constable (Driver) in Delhi Police on compassionate grounds, subject to satisfactory police verification of his character and antecedents etc. On receipt of the character and antecedents and police verification report, which revealed that the applicant was involved in case FIR No.1035/2007 u/s 279/337 IPC, PS Najafgarh, dated 21.12.2007, a show cause notice was issued to him, and his candidature has been cancelled vide order dated 03.02.2011. It appears that the matter came up before the screening committee, which was to assess the suitability of the applicant for the post of Constable (Driver), which examined the case of the applicant keeping in view the nature of his involvement, gravity of the offence, judgment of the court, the grounds of acquittal and the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court dated 04.10.1996 in Civil Appeal No.13231 of 1996 (arising out of SLP(C) No.5340 of...
Sandeep Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Police and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. In the appointment of the applicant on the post of Sub Inspector (Exe.) in Delhi Police, the only discordant view between the parties is that whereas, the applicant would claim that his height is 1.70 meters, exactly the minimum required for appointment on the post aforesaid, the respondents would state that he is marginally short of the required height. 2. We may mention at the very outset that there has been some controversy as regards the candidature of the applicant being a departmental OBC candidate or an open category OBC candidate, but is admitted by now that the applicant appeared as an open category OBC candidate, and had in that category obtained the cut-off marks for appointment on the post under contention. There would be, thus, no need to refer to the pleadings made by the parties in that regard. 3. The facts as may be relatable to the only controversy, as mentioned above, reveal that the applicant, before he made application for appointment on the ...
Ms. Deepti Sinha Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER (A): RA No.409/2011 1. Pursuant to the following orders of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in Writ Petition (C) No.7848/2011 in the matter of Deepti Sinha Versus Union of India and Others decided on 04.11.2011, the applicant has moved the present Review Appliation: “It is contended by Mr. Shankar Raju, learned counsel for the petitioner that even when charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner under Rule 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules for minor penalty proceedings, the petitioner had requested the disciplinary authority to hold a regular enquiry and give her an opportunity which was not acceded to by the disciplinary authority. Mr. Raju further contends that this plea was specifically taken in the OA but has not been dealt with appropriately. We find from the impugned order that no such plea of the petitioner is recorded or dealt with. If the petitioner had made the aforesaid submission and it is not dealt with, it is for the petitioner to move th...
Lalit Kumar Vs. Commissioner of Police and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Lalit Kumar, desiring to be a Constable (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police during the recruitment held in the year 2009, successfully competed for the post, having cleared all the tests. However, after putting him to notice and having his reply, vide order dated 11.04.2011 his candidature has been cancelled for his involvement in a criminal case FIR No.03/2006 u/s 332/353 IPC pertaining to PS Salhawas, District Jhajjar, Haryana, in which he had been acquitted on 19.02.2007. It is this order which is under challenge in the present Original Application filed by him under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 2. It is not in dispute that the applicant had revealed his involvement in the relevant columns of the application and attestation forms. His selection was provisional, subject to satisfactory verification of character and antecedents etc. In that exercise, it appears, the matter went before the screening committee, on the recommendations of which, th...
- ‹ Prev
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- Next ›
- Last »