Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: main memory Court: central administrative tribunal cat delhi Page 3 of about 641 results (0.083 seconds)

R.D. Bohet S/O Sh. Bhoop Singh, Vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi, Govt. of Nc ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... was the disciplinary authority and that if an inquiry were to be held, the principal witness for the department would have been the deputy chief commercial superintendent himself, resulting in the same person being the main accuser, the chief. .....

R.B. Singh Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Reported in : (2008)(2)SLJ214CAT

..... in their said reply it was stated that recommendations of dpc held in upsc on 29.3.2005, were considered by competent authority, and promotion of 6 officials, included in the main panel and one officer of the extended panel were approved to the grade of chief engineer (civil). ..... based on recommendations of said dpc, competent authority approved promotion of six officers, included in main panel and one official in extended panel, vide order dated 05.9.2005. .....

Dr. Sarbesh Bhattacharjee Vs. Department of Health and Family Welfare ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

v.k. bali, chairman: 1. there is minimal interference by courts and tribunals in the matter of suspension of a government employee. from amongst the limited grounds, however, it is settled proposition of law that one ground to interfere in the matter of suspension would be where the order may not have been passed by the competent authority. this precisely is the primary plea of the applicant in the present original application filed by him under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, questioning the order of suspension dated 02.11.2011 passed by the principal secretary (handfw), government of nct of delhi, the first respondent herein, less than three months prior to the date when the applicant was to superannuate. the original application during its pendency has been amended twice. we will make mention of the amendments brought about in the application during its pendency at the relevant time. 2. the facts as extracted from the amended oa, insofar as the same are relevant, would need a necessary mention at this stage. the applicant joined in arunachal pradesh as medical officer on ad hoc basis on 15.01.1976 and was regularized through upsc in central health services general duty medical officer (gdmo) sub cadre with effect from 30.10.1976. it is his positive case that the union of india, the third respondent herein, is his appointing authority. the applicant has given by and large details of the places of his postings and the promotions he earned from time to .....

Virender Kumar Kaul S/O Shri S.L. Vs. Union of India (Uoi), Through

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... whenever a clarification comes in conflict with the main provisions and has a tendency to override the provisions of the main scheme the same shall not be admissible but when the scheme itself in paragraph-7 provides two financial upgradations without creation of post in the next hierarchy in case of any disturbance in hierarchy by reduction of pay scale or by creation of an .....

Radhey Shyam Vs. Union of India Through General Manager and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... the main grounds of challenge to the aforesaid orders of the disciplinary and the appellate authority are the following: that there had been large number of procedural irregularities in the conduct of the inquiry as a result of which the entire .....

N. Mohammad, Jag Danics Project Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Reported in : (2007)(3)SLJ1CAT

1. applicant an ad hoc junior administrative grade (jag) officer of danics vide this o.a. has assailed a presidential order dated 31.8.2005 wherein concurring with the advice of upsc in pursuance of disciplinary proceeding under rule 14 of ccs (cca) rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to "1965 rules"), a major penalty of compulsory retirement has been imposed upon him.2. brief factual matrix of the case transpires that the applicant, who initially joined service with respondents as tehsildar in 1972, vide notification dated 30.8.1994, was appointed to officiate as a selection grade officer w.e.f. 17.5.1993 and was appointed on ad hoc basis as jag for a period of six months. applicant owned property bearing survey no.72 at port blair, which was earlier in the name of his father, who died in 1979. the aforesaid property was mutated jointly in the name of his wife and sons. the ground floor was rented, which goes to the mother of the applicant. the remaining rent was being received by his brother. as the condition of the building was dilapidated and unfit for human habitation, applicant on 2.12.1992 informed the deputy commissioner, andmans, the competent authority to get the property converted into rcc one. the permission was accorded on 30.12.1992. the aforesaid permission to reconstruct was done on a survey by revenue and pwd authorities. the building plan on application was also approved. on 29.1.1993, under section 159 (9) of andaman and nicobar islands, land revenue and .....

Sh. Onkar Singh S/O Sh. Naurang Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

1. as the facts involved are identical and issues raised are common, both these cases are being disposed of by this common order.2. in both the oas, applicants impugn orders dated 31.08.2006 (annexure a-1) and 04.09.2006 (annexure a-2) vide which they have been transferred along with posts and the same have been issued purportedly on administrative ground.applicant (onkar singh) has challenged the aforesaid orders on the ground that the same have been issued as a punishment on account of false and fabricated complaint made by the union officials against whom the applicant had been protesting for sexually harassing a widow worker (smt. kamlesh). however, the orders are punitive and have been issued by respondent no. 2 without giving any reasonable opportunity to the applicant, or holding any departmental proceeding.applicant, who was working as a helper khalasi under respondent no. 2 in a satisfactory manner, had taken a stand against one powerful union leader sh. mehboob khan against his indecent and immoral behaviour towards one widow worker, namely, smt. kamlesh, who had been complaining against sh. mehboob khan for harassing her sexually and the applicant has lodged a strong protest against the union leader sh.mahboob khan. he, in turn, became very vindictive and revengeful against the said lady who was thereafter forced to lodge her complaint along with another lady worker to the grp, meerut cantt on 17.07.2004 requesting for protection against the illegal advances and .....

S.K. Ahuja Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... officials who were actually involved in handling the procurement matters relating to curtain and rods of police training college whereas he is at the supervisory level and the appellate authoritys order has clearly indicated that the main responsibility lies on the principal of police training college under whose directions the subordinate officials have taken action. ..... it is seen from the order of the appellate authority that the principal of the ptc is the main delinquent under whose directions the irregular procurement of curtain and curtain rods got regularized. ..... shri singhs contention is that the applicant being the main charged officer, the disciplinary case should be allowed to reach its logical conclusion. .....

Constable Ravi Kumar S/O Shri Vs. Govt. of Nct of Delhi Through Chief

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... thus the main line of argument taken by the applicant is that utp ranbir kumar singh, on whose complaint the disciplinary proceedings were initiated and who was also cited as a witness in the list of witnesses, served along with charge .....

Manohar Lal, Executive Engineer Vs. Union of India (Uoi) Through the

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

..... ) rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as the rules of 1965) on the following articles of charge: the estimated cost of the work 'c/o raj niwas at civil lines, delhi (sah: chemical ceiling of terrace and sunken portion of toilets of the main building)' was rs. .....