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.
Rajiv Tandon Vs. the Government of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Rajiv Tandon and others, belonging to the Indian Police Service (IPS), filed seven separate Original Applications, questioning the constitutionality/legality of notification dated 20/29.01.1994 amending/substituting proviso to rule 3(3)(i) of the IPS (Regulation of Seniority) Rules, 1988 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules of 1988), with retrospective effect from 1988. This Tribunal in OA No.632/1996 in the matter of Ashok Kumar v Union of India, decided on 16.03.2000, had already upheld the said notification. The Division Bench seized of this matter was of the opinion that some of the relevant issues involved in the matter were not considered by the Tribunal in Ashok Kumar’s case, and, therefore, the matter was referred to a larger Bench. The larger Bench of this Tribunal vide order dated 18.03.2010 held that the decision in Ashok Kumar (supra) did not lay correct law, and over-ruled it. The matter was not finally disposed of, as the question of limi...
inspector Ved Bhushan Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi Through Commissio ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Ved Bhushan, an Inspector in Delhi Police, the applicant herein, has been visited with the penalty of censure vide order dated 31.01.2011 passed by Deputy Commissioner of Police, North-West District, Delhi. The said order has since been confirmed in appeal preferred by the applicant by Joint Commissioner of Police, Northern Range, Delhi, vide order dated 16.07.2011. These are the orders that have been challenged by the applicant in this Original Application filed by him under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 2. Brief facts of the case culminating into the orders aforesaid reveal that a show cause notice dated 23.03.2010 came to be issued to the applicant alleging that while posted in East District as SHO/Shakarpur (now SHO/Model Town), he committed grave misconduct, negligence, inaction as well as dereliction in the discharge of his official duties, inasmuch as on 09.02.2010, SHO/Mandawali and ACP/Madhu Vihar sent two DD entries No. 34-A dat...
N.C. Jedia Vs. Delhi Development Authority Through Its Chairman, Vikas ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. We have already referred to the salient features of the case while issuing notice on 03.08.2011, and vide another order dated 02.01.2012. Since the basic facts of the case and the controversy involved in the matter have already been mentioned, we could well say that the present order be read in continuation of the orders aforesaid, but as that may cause some inconvenience to those who might like to read the judgment, we will bodily lift both the orders and reproduce them. The same read, thus: Order dated 03.08.2011 “The applicant joined Delhi Development Authority (DDA) on 30.10.1988 as a direct recruit Assistant Engineer (Electrical). He was promoted to the post of Executive Engineer (Electrical) on 5.11.1999 and to the post of Superintending Engineer (Electrical) on 8.7.2008. The order of his promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer (Electrical) has been withdrawn vide impugned order dated 20.7.2011. This is the order in question in the present O...
Trilok Chand Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
ORAL: 1. By this Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking implementation by the respondents of their own order dated 9.3.2009 revising provisional pension of the applicant as per VIth Pay Commission’s recommendations, a copy of which is at Annexure C. Even though the applicant has been informed of the revision of his pay as aforesaid, the respondents are yet to release the benefits of the revised pension to the applicant even after about three years of the passing of the order of revision referred to above. 2. The applicant is an old person of 72 years. He retired on 31.12.1997 as Executive Engineer (MIS) (NDZIV). He was granted provisional pension only in terms of Rule 69 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 on account of pendency of judicial proceedings against him in respect of death of his daughter-in-law. The applicant had earlier filed OA being OA No.1558 of 1998 for release of regular pension whic...
Vikram Singh Vs. Ministry of Home Affairs Government of India Through ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Vikram Singh, an Inspector (Exe.) in Delhi Police, the applicant herein, has filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking direction to be issued to the respondents to promote him on the next higher rank of Assistant commissioner of Police/induction into the entry grade of DANIPS in the ongoing process, as also quash and set aside the decision communicated to him vide letter dated 19.03.2008 pertaining to withholding of recommendation of the review DPC convened on 23.07.2007, and in consequence thereof, to give effect to the recommendations of the review DPC. 2. The brief facts on which the reliefs as mentioned above are sought to rest reveal that the applicant was considered for promotion to the post of Inspector (Exe.) on 05.06.2006, when he was ignored because of a penalty of censure, which had been inflicted upon him earlier in point of time. The applicant filed OA No.1671/2006 in this Tribunal, challengi...
Y.S. Chaudhary and Others Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
SHAILENDRA PandEY, MEMBER (A): By this common order, we propose to dispose of the OA 280/2008 and OA 2661/2010, as they involve identical issues of facts and law. The issue involved in the above OAs is whether the delay in convening meeting of the DPCs by the respondents (Railway Board) in the case of the applicants was due to reasons beyond control or because of administrative delay/inefficiency and what would be the consequence if the delay on the part of the respondents is not found to be explained/justified. For the sake of convenience, it would be necessary to briefly record the facts of the case in Writ Petition (C) No.2020/2011 [arising out of OA No.280/2008 filed by Shri Y.S.Chaudhary and Others]. In this OA the applicant and four others were Group `B’ officers and had been substantively appointed in Group `A’/Junior Scale of the IRSE with effect from 14.1.2005 vide Ministry of Railways Notification dated 23.03.2005 and their revised inter se seniority in IRSE on th...
Smt. K. Jayalakshmi Vs. Union of India and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER (A): 1. Smt. K. Jayalakshmi, the applicant herein, who was appointed on the post of Dark Room Assistant on 22.03.1995 in the pay scale of Rs.1150-25-1500. She was promoted as Plate Maker which she joined on 17.03.2006 in the pre-revised pay scale of Rs.4000-6000. It is the case of the applicant that on the recommendation of the Internal Departmental Committee, the pay scales of Dark Room Assistant were revised to the pay scale of Rs.1200-30-1440-EB-30-1800 in all other Departments of the Government of India, whereas no such recommendations were ever received in the SSB Department through Cabinet Secretariat. The 5th Central Pay Commission (CPC) recommended Rs.3050-75-4900 and Rs.4000-6000 as replacement scales for the above two pay scales (Rs.1150-1500 and Rs.1200-1800). As the applicant did not get the revised pay scales, she submitted her representation dated 10.10.2001 (Annexure-A3) claiming that she should be granted the revised pay scale of Rs.4000...
Sanjiv Gupta Vs. Government of Nct of Delhi Through Its Chief Secretar ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Sanjiv Gupta, an Inspector in Delhi Police, the applicant herein, has been visited with the penalty of censure vide order dated 10.03.2011 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police, North-East District, Delhi, which has since been confirmed in appeal preferred by him, by the Special Commissioner of Police, New Delhi Range, vide order dated 30.05.2011. These are the two orders which are under challenge in the present Original Application filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. 2. Brief facts of the case reveal that a show cause notice for censure came to be issued to the applicant on 20.01.2011 for his alleged grave misconduct, negligence, carelessness and dereliction in discharge of official duties, in that on perusal of case FIR No.265/10 dated 21.12.2010 u/s 379 PS Seelam Pur, it came to be observed that the occurrence of theft of a motorcycle took place on 24.08.2010 and was reported in the police station on the sa...
Shaukat Ali Vs. Commissioner of Police and Another
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
V.K. BALI, CHAIRMAN: 1. Shaukat Ali, aspiring to be a Constable (Exe.) Male in Delhi Police, cleared all the tests for recruitment on the post under contention in the recruitment process gone into by the respondents in the year 2009. He was provisionally selected subject to verification of his character and antecedents, medical fitness and final checking of documents, etc. In the exercise undertaken by the respondents of verification of his character and antecedents etc., it came to the notice of the respondents that a criminal case pertaining to FIR No.93/2004 u/s 323/324/34 IPC, PS Amb, District Una (HP) was registered against him, in which he was acquitted on 28.09.2006. It is not in dispute that the applicant had disclosed his involvement in the case aforesaid in all the relevant documents. The case of the applicant as regards his criminal involvement came to be examined by the screening committee constituted by the Commissioner of Police, Delhi, in view of the nature of his involv...
A.K. Sharma Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi and Others
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Mar-07-2012
DR. RAMESH CHandRA PandA, MEMBER (A): 1. Shri A.K. Sharma, the applicant herein, formerly Sales Tax Officer is presently Assistant Registrar (RCS), while functioning as Sales Tax Officer in Ward-03, is alleged to have committed misconduct and lapses in as much as he handled the refund application of M/s International Metro Civil Contractors carelessly and in a very casual manner violating the provisions of Section 30 of Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975 and Rule 29 of the Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1975. It is alleged that he also tampered with the records while recording order sheet on 14.08.2003, which has been adversely commented by Delhi High Court in the case of M/s International Metro Civil Contractors Versus CST and Anr. while passing judgment in the said case on 20.07.2004. However, a charge sheet was issued to him vide memorandum dated 22.02.2006 mentioning therein for his omission and commission by which he has failed to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty besides acting in a ...
- ‹ Prev
- 17
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›
- Last »