Delhi Court July 2012 Judgments
Browse smarter
Turn browsing into brief-ready notes
Open any judgment and get a structured AI Brief in seconds — plus Semantic Search when you need to hunt by meaning, not keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed — log in to pick up where you left off.
Yatindra Nath Raj, Delhi Vs. the G.M. Northern Rly, H.Q. Office, New D ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Mr M.L. Chauhan, Member (J) 1. The applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: 8.1 Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to produce the record of above said case. 8.2 Direct the respondent to reinstate the applicant since date of suspension 29.12.82 till date of acquittal 14.08.06. Further up to 31.12.09 when the applicant has been dismissed for last time by Disciplinary Authority which was quashed by Board of Inquiry Decision dated 10.06.2010 and has made entitled the applicant will all consequential benefits as demanded by Annexure A-11 and A-15 i.e. noticed dated 01.03.2011. 8.3 That direct the respondent to comply their order dated 10.06.2010 Annexure A-19. 8.4 That any other or further relief which the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be awarded in favour of the app...
Chanda Tiwari, New Delhi Vs. Govt of Nct of Delhi Through Its Chief Se ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Member (A): 1. The applicant of this OA is before us for the second time. She had earlier come before this Tribunal in OA No. 1475/2011, in which orders were passed on 28.04.2011 directing the respondents to pass a reasoned order on her representation dated 14.03.2011. The respondents thereafter passed the impugned order dated 28.06.2011 in compliance of the directions given by this Tribunal, stating as follows:- “THAT the present order is being passed in compliance of CAT’s order dated 28.4.2011 in O.A. No. 1475/11 in case titled Smt. Chandra Tiwari Vs. GNCTD”. WHEREAS as per record, Smt. Chandra Tiwari was disengaged from the post of House Aunty on the ground of negligence in performance of her duties resulting in escape of 6 mentally retarded children from Asha Kiran Complex w.e.f. 10.03.1998. WHEREAS Smt. Chandra Tiwari made a representation dated 14.3.2011 for considering her engagement to the post of Aya. Her case was not cons...
Yatindra Nath Raj, Delhi Vs. the G.M. Northern Rly, H.Q. Office, Barod ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-25-2012
Mr M.L. Chauhan, Member (J) 1. The applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: 8.1 Keeping in view the above said facts and circumstances of the case the Hon’ble Court may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents to produce the record of above said case. 8.2 Direct the respondent to reinstate the applicant since date of suspension 29.12.82 till date of acquittal 14.08.06. Further up to 31.12.09 when the applicant has been dismissed for last time by Disciplinary Authority which was quashed by Board of Inquiry Decision dated 10.06.2010 and has made entitled the applicant will all consequential benefits as demanded by Annexure A-11 and A-15 i.e. noticed dated 01.03.2011. 8.3 That direct the respondent to comply their order dated 10.06.2010 Annexure A-19. 8.4 That any other or further relief which the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case may kindly be awarded in favour of the app...
Anand Singh, Delhi Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, (Govt. of Nct of D ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Mr. M.L. Chauhan, Member (J): 1. Applicant has filed this OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: (a) quash and set-aside the impugned Memo/Order No.Narela/PFC(Dr.)/Retirement/12/33 dated 05.01.2012 issued by the respondent no.2, thereby the applicant may kindly be permitted to be retained in the department as a driver with all consequential benefits of pay, seniority, increment, back wages etc.; and (b) Quash and set-aside the impugned Report dated 29,12.2011 given by respondent no.3. (c) Pass any other order(s), in favour of the applicant which this Honble Tribunal may deems fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of case as well as in the interest of justice. 2. Briefly stated, facts of the case are that the applicant, joined the DTC on the post of Driver in the year 1988. The case projected by the applicant is that he had sustained injuries in the toe of his left foot, for which he underwent treatment in Safdarjung hospital and AIIMS an...
Ex. Constable Ramesh Kumar, Haryana Vs. the Secretary, North Block, Ne ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
ORDER (ORAL) Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) 1. Applicant has challenged order issued on 26.6.1995 (page 19A) whereby his services were terminated under Rule 5 (1) of CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965. 2. It is submitted by the applicant that he was appointed as a member of Delhi Police with effect from 5.2.1993 as a Constable. He had declared himself as Scheduled Tribe by mentioning that he belongs to Bawaria Caste. To his surprise he was terminated from service vide order dated 26.6.1995 illegally. Orally he was informed that he did not belong to ST. 3. It is submitted by the counsel for the applicant that termination was absolutely illegal and arbitrary as no reasons were given why his services were being terminated, therefore, he gave a representation on 9.5.1996 followed by reminders dated 22.3.2004 and 21.4.2012 but no reply has been given, therefore, in these circumstances, he had no other option but to file the present OA. 4. It is stated by the counsel for the applican...
Budh Parkash, Meerut Cantt Vs. the Secretary, Govt. of India, Ministry ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Member (A) 1. Applicant of this OA is aggrieved by the imposition of the penalty of compulsory retirement through the impugned Annexure A-1 dated 29/30.04.2010. He is doubly aggrieved with these orders, as they appear to be a sequential effect and reaction of the respondents against the favourable orders, which he had obtained from this Tribunal earlier in OA No.1220/2010 relating to the change in his date of birth. The applicant had also filed a statutory appeal against the impugned order of compulsory retirement passed by the Disciplinary Authority, but his appeal was also rejected by the Appellate Authority through order dated 29.04.2010 communicated to him through Annexure A-3(a). 2. The applicant’s earlier OA No.1220/2010 was regarding the change in his date of birth and this Tribunal had upheld the date of birth as recorded in the applicant’s Matriculation Certificate. The employment of the applicant was continued since the ju...
Harpreet Singh and Others Vs. State of Delhi
Court: Delhi
Decided on: Jul-23-2012
SANJIV KHANNA, J: 1. These four appeals by Harpreet Singh, Satyender Singh, Kuldeep Singh and Munish Kumar impugn the judgment dated 17th August, 2009 in Case No. 10/2004 arising out of FIR No. 247/2003 and the order of sentence dated 22nd August, 2009. The appellants Harpreet Singh and Satyender Singh have been convicted under Section 376(2)(g) of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC, for short) and all the appellants-accused have been convicted under Section 394/366/34 IPC. Kuldeep Singh and Munish Kumar were also tried for charge under Section 376(2)(g) IPC, but have been acquitted. State has not preferred any appeal against the said acquittal. 2. The appellants-Harpreet Singh and Satyender Singh have been awarded life imprisonment for the offence under Section 376(2)(g) and directed to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for nine months. For the offence under Section 394 IPC, the appellants have been awarded life imprisonment and...
Birmanand, Ghaziabad (U.P.) and Others Vs. the Union of India (Through ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Dr. Dharam Paul Sharma, Member (J): 1. In these 15 OAs, the applicants are seeking redressal of their grievances arising on account of identical and similar cause of action relating to their non-absorption against regular posts while considering regularization of their services. All these applicants are represented by the same counsel Shri V.P.S. Tyagi and have been heard together, taking OA No.2523/2011 as the leading case. Accordingly, all these Applications are disposed of by this common order. 2. The reliefs sought for by the applicant in Original Application No.2523/2011 are as follows, namely, this Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to:- (a) Hold and declare the Contention of the respondents put-forth in the speaking order under challenge to be not in consonance with the spirit of para 53 of Uma Devis Judgment where citing reference to other paras thereof which had to be pressed in action in the matter of selection of freshers other than the applicant’s on req...
Ram Tirth, Recruit Constable (Ex.) in Delhi Police, Haryana Vs. Commis ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
ORDER (ORAL) Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) 1. Applicant has challenged order dated 13.9.2011 whereby his request for conducting third medical examination through an Expert Board for the post of Constable (Executive) Male in Delhi Police has been rejected on the ground that he was declared medically unfit for the post of Constable (Executive ) Male in Delhi Police by two different Medical Boards constituted at ESI Hospital, Rohini, New Delhi and later by ESI Hospital, Basai Darapur, New Delhi. Applicant has further sought a declaration that each and every medical condition that makes a person unfit has some rational/logic behind the same that has something to do with the job requirement of the post but no such rational/logic is shown in the present case while rejecting the claim of the applicant, therefore, respondents be directed to constitute and appoint an independent Special Medical Board to resolve the issue whether absence of testicle will make a person unfit for the post...
Sh. D.C. Ninan, New Delhi and Others Vs. Secretary, Govt of India, Min ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
Decided on: Jul-20-2012
Mr. S.P. Singh, Member (A) 1. This O.A. has been instituted by the applicants seeking following relief:- (i) That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order by way of quashing and setting aside the orders issued by respondents No. 2 vide no. A/23722/CC/OS-8C (ii) dated 17.11.2011 and Respondent No.3 vide No. 691360/Steno-I/DCN/CA-6 dated 03.8.2011 under which the applicants claim for upgradation to Steno Grade II w.e.f. 6.2.1989, was rejected. that the Hon’ble Tribunal may direct the respondent No. 3 i.e. Officer Incharge (Records) to grant the applicants upgradation from Steno Grade III to Grade II w.e.f. 6.2.1989 or on completion of 5 years as Steno Grade III in terms of DoPandT OM dated 06.2.1989 with all consequential benefits as given to those similarly placed Steno Grade III who have been given upgradation retrospectively in compliance of the directions of Hon’ble Tribunal Benches of Guwahati and Calcutta in OA No. 129/1993 and OA No. ...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »