Delhi Court April 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.
Hari Chand Saketary Vs. Union of India Through General Manager, North ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
Dr. A.K. Mishra, Member (A) 1. This application has been filed with a prayer to issue direction to respondent No.3 (Divl. Railway Manager (DRM), West Central Railway, Kota) to forward the service record of the applicant to DRM, Allahabad to determine the retiral benefits of the applicant afresh after taking into consideration the period of service the applicant rendered under DRM, Kota from 1968 to 1978 and further for a direction to the respondents to expeditiously decide his retiral benefits and grant him all consequential benefits including interest on the amount due to be paid after fresh determination is made. 2. According to the applicant, he joined under DRM, Kota on 25.09.1968 as a Cleaner and subsequently was promoted as 2nd Fireman. While working as a confirmed railway employee at Kota he applied for the post of Guard in response to the advertisement of Railway Recruitment Board, Allahabad. He was duly selected for the post of Guard (Grade-C) and was so informed by the office...
S.C. Ahuja Vs. the Honand#8217;ble Lt. Governor Govt. of Nct of Delhi ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
M.L. Chauhan, J. 1. The applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “1. To quash and set-aside the impugned orders dated 29-10-2009 (Communicated with letter dated 9-11-09) and order dated 11-12-2009 (Ann.A-1 to A-3) 2. To direct the Respondents for refund of the amount recovered of 2% cut in pension for one year in one time from pension under the impugned order, with penal interest. 3. To grant all consequential benefits to treat the period of suspension as period spent on duty for all purposes and payments of interests at the GPF rates on the amounts of D.C.R. Gratuity and Leave encashment paid belatedly on 29-11-10 and 16-6-11 respectively on account of pendency of this case, as if the impugned orders had not been issued. 4. To grant any other relief as this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit in the interest of justice, and 5. To award costs of this application.” 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the applicant while working as ...
Mane Bandu Gangadhar and Another Vs. Agricultural Scientists Recruitme ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
S.C. Sharma, Acting Chairman: 1. Instant Original Application has been instituted seeking to quash the selection process dated 16.10.2009 and to declare the ARS viva voce conducted on 18.09.2009 as null and void being contrary to the principles of natural justice and in breach of fundamental rights of the applicants, and to direct the respondents to select the candidates as per the eligibility criteria mentioned in the notification dated 03.12.2008. 2. The facts of the case may be summarized as follows: It has been alleged by the applicants that the applicant No.1 is working as Assistant Professor in Veterinary College, Palampur, Himachal Pradesh, whereas the applicant No.2 is working as Assistant Professor in College of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Udgir, District Latur, Maharashtra. The respondent No.1 is the Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board (ASRB), New Delhi, which conducted the selection process for the post of major discipline: Animal Product Technology, and sub discip...
Ram Niwas Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi Through Its Commissioner ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
M.L. Chauhan, J. 1. The applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: “(a) Quash and set aside the order dated 2.6.2010 passed by the respondent, which states that the applicant will not entitled to get any salary/ financial benefits for the intervening period i.e. 21.4.1998 to the date of joining on 9.6.2010. (b) Direct the respondent to give salary/ financial benefits for the intervening period i.e. 21.4.1998 to the date of joining on 9.6.2010. (c) Award costs of the proceedings and (d) Pass any other order/direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in favour of the applicant and against the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the applicant was engaged as daily wager Driver by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD) w.e.f. 13.4.1989. In terms of the decision taken by the respondent to regularize the services of daily wager, the case of the applicant wa...
Bheron Dutt and Another Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretary Minis ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
ORAL: M.L. Chauhan, J. MA 927/2012 MA seeking joining together in a single petition is allowed. OA 1088/2012 1. This is a second round of litigation. Earlier the applicants had filed OA-2721/2011, thereby praying that the respondents may be directed to consider the case of the applicants for merger from the Trade of Packer to Carpenter SK and re-designate them as Carpenter SK with effect from the date of decision taken by the respondents or from the date their juniors have been re-designated as Carpenter SK, with consequential benefits. The said OA was disposed of by this Tribunal vide order dated 12.8.2011 whereby respondent No.3, i.e., Chief Engineer Delhi Zone, Delhi Cantt. was directed to look into the representation of the applicants, treating the OA as supplementary representation and decide the same in accordance with the rules within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. 2. Pursuant to the directions given by the Tribunal, the respondents ha...
Ankit Steels Vs. Cce, Raipur
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
Per Mathew John: 1. When the matter was called none appeared for the Appellant. Therefore record was perused and the Authorized Representative of Revenue was heard. 2. The appeal came up on a few occasions but was adjourned. On the last occasion namely on 18-11-11 nobody turned up. Today also none is present. 3. The dispute in this appeal is relating to Modvat credit taken by the appellants during the period June 1996 for an amount of Rs. 69409/- 4. The appellants were manufacturing M. S. Ribbed Bars, M. S. Rounds and M. S. Flats falling under chapter 72 and 73 of the Central Excise Tariff. They had availed Cenvat credit on mis-rolls falling under sub-heading 7216.10 of CETA 1985 during Sep 1996. 5. Rule 57G, as was in force at the relevant period, required that an assessee should declare the description of goods indicating classification thereof before taking credit on inputs to be used for manufacture of final product. The Appellant had filed such declaration indicating defective ang...
M/S Kisan Sahkari Chinni Mills Ltd Vs. Cce, Lucknow
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Apr-02-2012
Per Mathew John, J. 1. The appellants are manufacturers of sugar. During the period May 2000 they had taken Modvat credit on various items which were used for fabricating items like vacuum tank, syrup extraction receiver, stationary flange juice guard etc. and claimed Modvat credit on these items under Rule 57Q of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. The Revenue felt that on these items the appellants could not have taken Modvat credit for reasons like that the goods were structural items, the goods were not covered by the definition of Capital Goods in Rule 57Q, the goods were not covered by the declaration given under Rule 57(T) etc. A Show Cause Notice was issued for recovery of such credit taken amounting to Rs. 7,41,415/-. The demand was initially confirmed for Rs. 7,40,935/- along with interest and penalties. The appellants filed appeal with the Commissioner (Appeals) who give relief in respect of credit on many items and restricted the demand to Rs.1,79,126.38 and reduced the penalt...
- ‹ Prev
- 18
- 19
- 20
- 21
- 22
- 23
- 24
- 25
- 26
- 27
- Next ›