Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: explosives act 1884 section 4 definitions Sorted by: old Court: central administrative tribunal cat delhi Page 17 of about 205 results (0.110 seconds)

Mar 14 2012 (TRI)

Ratan Lal Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation and Another

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... learned counsel for the applicant and perused the oa. 5. we observe, at the very outset, that the oa is clearly barred by limitation as prescribed under section-21 of the administrative tribunals act 1985. the punishment of stoppage of three increments with cumulative effect was inflicted upon the applicant in 1991 and the order of secretary (labour) was passed in 2004 ..... case of d.c.s. negi vs. union of india (special leave to appeal (civil) no. 7956/2011) decided on 07.03.2011 that the administrative tribunal established under the act is duty bound to first consider whether the application is within limitation and that an application can be admitted only if the same is found to have been made within .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 03 2012 (TRI)

Devender Kumar Vs. the General Manager, Nw Railway, Jaipur and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... period applicable to the appropriate case and the tribunal should be required to satisfy itself whether the explanation offered was proper explanation as prescribed under section 21 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985. in view of above, it is duty of the court to see whether the delay has been properly explained by the person ..... one representation dated 5.11.1989 but thereafter he did not seem to have taken action to seek redressal of his grievance. according to section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, the period of limitation is one year from the date of cause of action or within 18 months in case representation is given ..... the case, we consider it necessary to note that for quite some time, the administrative tribunals established under the act have been entertaining and deciding the applications filed under section 19 of the act in complete disregard of the mandate of section 21, which reads as under:- 21. limitation - (1) a tribunal shall not admit an application, - .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2012 (TRI)

Rakesh Kumar Vs. the Union of India Through the Foreign Secretary/Secr ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... keep the departmental proceedings in abeyance till the finalization of criminal trial was rejected. assailing the said order, the applicant has instituted the instant oa under section 19 of the administrative tribunal act, 1985 with the following prayers:- 1. the applicant prays that in the interest of justice, and without prejudice to his right to pray for ..... read with s. 420, 468 and 471 of the indian penal code and u/s 13(2) read with sub-section 13(1)(d) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 and substantive offences under the said act; 2. the applicant further prays that the annexure a-5 being the order dated 02.07.2008, appointing the presenting ..... central bureau of investigation (cbi in short) to prosecute him for the offences under section 120 b of ipc read with section 420, 468 and 471 of the ipc and under section 13(2) with sub section 13(1) (d) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 (poc act), as both are based on same sets of facts, allegations, documents and witnesses. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 13 2012 (TRI)

<td Class=btext Bgcolor=#ffffff><span Class=boldtxt>parties :</Span> D ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... 21 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, by 12.08.2009, which she has not done and the present application having been filed only on 19.09.2011 is barred by limitation ..... her dated 03.02.2004, the last portion of which stated as follows:- ..and is admitted in the anm register maintained under the provisions of the delhi nursing council act, 1997 (delhi act no.3 of 1999) as a registered auxiliary nurse midwife/mphw(f)/lhv/health supervisor. the number assigned to her in the register is: 879. 5. this ..... rti act, 2005. 11. the second ground was that the applicant had appeared in response to the advertisement, which was published in september, 2007, the examination in respect of which was conducted on 03.05.2008, and the result was declared on 13.08.2008. if the applicant was aggrieved by the result, she could have filed her oa in terms of section .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 18 2012 (TRI)

Sunil Kumar Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through Commissioner of Police, ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... the father lodged the complaint in the first instance and why the victim girl named the applicant for his involvement in the alleged offence in her statement recorded under section 164 of code of criminal procedure. keeping in view the offence, its quality and nature and other relevant factors, the respondents upon due consideration found the applicant unsuitable ..... acquitted for lack of ample evidence, his conduct shows that he has no regard for law and fearlessly indulged in a case which the society treats as a shameful act. the committee therefore did not find him fit to be appointed in delhi police and accordingly had not recommended his case. the very fact that out of 27 ..... committee, as in the opinion of the said committee, the conduct of the applicant shows that he has no regard for law and fearlessly indulged in a shameful act, in view of which he was not found suitable for appointment in the disciplined force like delhi police. as per the directions issued vide phqs uo note .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 19 2012 (TRI)

Npc Employees Association (Regd.) Through Its General Secretary, Praka ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... , 2002(1) scc 766 while dealing with section-13 of the contempt of courts act, the honble apex court observed:- 10. section 13 of the contempt of courts act says that notwithstanding anything contained in any law for the time being in force, no court shall impose a sentence "unless ..... security finance (p) ltd. and another vs. dattaraya raghav agge and ors., air 1970 sc 720 the honble apex court observed every act cannot be a defiance or willful negligence of the courts order. any act which is intentional, deliberate and has a character of disrespect with malafides is a contumacious disobedience. again, in suresh chandra poddar vs. dhani ram .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 20 2012 (TRI)

Balbir Singh, (Asstt., Fitter) Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation Through ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... (1991) 2 supp scc 190 paragraph 10]. 11. the said impugned order of the respondents dated 03.03.2011 submits that the benefits in terms of section 79 of the factories act, 1948 are being extended to the applicants. the benefits in terms of workshop staff of the respondents-corporation are also stated to be in receipt of the ..... benefits under the drta (delhi road transport authority) act, 1950. it is further sated that as per the drta (conditions of appointment and service) regulations, 1952, clause 14 (6) (c) is applicable in case of employees ..... . it is stated that prior to this, they were governed by the dta act, 1950, and that the dtc had opted to be governed by chapter viii [particularly sections 78 and 79, which pertain to earned leave] of the factory act, 1948. it is further stated that the delhi transport corporation (respondent no.1) is an autonomous body and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 26 2012 (TRI)

V.P. Garg Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through Chief Secretary and Anothe ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

dr. dharam paul sharma, member (j): 1. the applicant, a dy. supdt. grade-ii in central jail tihar, has filed this application under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985 praying for following reliefs :- 8.1 to direct the respondents to release the annual increments falling on 01.07.2004, 01.07.2005, 01.07.2006 and 01.07. .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 30 2012 (TRI)

inder Singh Vs. Commissioner of Police, Phq, Mso Building, I.P. Estate ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... jurisdiction, power and authority to reach a finding of fact or conclusion. but that finding must be based on some evidence. neither the technical rules of evidence act nor of proof of fact or evidence as defined therein, apply to disciplinary proceeding. when the authority accepts that evidence and conclusion receives support therefrom, the ..... disciplinary authority is entitled to hold that the delinquent office is guilty of the charge. the court/tribunal on its power of judicial review does not act as appellate authority to reappreciate the evidence and to arrive at the own independent findings on the evidence. the court/tribunal may interfere where the authority held ..... or utterly perverse. it is appropriate to remember that the power to impose penalty on a delinquent officer is conferred on the competent authority either by an act of legislature or rules made under the proviso to article 309 of the constitution. if there has been an enquiry consistent with the rules and in .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 04 2012 (TRI)

Attar Singh Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... the appellant-employer. after a departmental enquiry, the charges had been proved and dismissal order passed. however, the respondent had been acquitted of offences under section 457 and 381 read with section 34 ipc in criminal revision. at the level of the labour court, the dismissal order had been upheld. dealing with the effect of acquittal in criminal ..... however, although it is very likely that shri attar singh committed these acts for monetary considerations/gain for himself, conclusive evidence in this regard, as to who paid what amount to the co and at what place and time have not been submitted ..... services selection boards at bangalore and that he was caught red-handed while offering the bribe, on the complaint of maj kapoor, and thus failed to maintain absolute integrity and acted in a manner unbecoming of a govt servant and thereby contravened the provisions of rule 3 (1) (i) and 3 (1) (iii) ccs (conduct) rules, 1964, .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organize Client Files //