Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
..... he was carrying a letter for major kapoor from a commonly known person with a request to help him in the treatment of his wife; (k) one main state witness major general lasrado, vsm had not appeared during the enquiry; (l) despite the irregularities, the charge of collecting huge amount from the said candidates had not been proved during the ..... the main points raised in the appeal were again listed and dealt with in the aas order individually and with reasons. ..... the main points as per the representation, noted and dealt individually with reasons by the da were: (a) the charge of collecting huge amount had been disproved by the io; (b) the department held in abeyance the disciplinary proceedings for two .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
dr. ramesh chandra panda, member (a) 1. shri rajavelu simon, applicant herein, while working as administrative officer, jpna trauma centre at the all india institute of medical sciences (aiims), new delhi has been inflicted with the punishment of dismissal from service vide order dated 12.7.2011 (annexure-a) for the alleged misconduct of the use of sexually coloured remarks and advances by him against three women employees. feeling aggrieved by the said order, he has approached the tribunal under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, with following prayers:- (a) call for the original file(s)/record(s) of the respondents dealing with the impugned order no.f.vig./2-857/2010 dated 12.7.2011 (annexure-a impugned); inquiry report dated 15.1.2010 forwarded vide letter no.f.w.o./cshq/2009-2010 dated 15.1.2010 [annexure-a-1 (colly) impugned] and memorandum no.f.w.o./cshq/2009-2010 dated 20.08.2009 (annexure-a-2 impugned). declare the impugned order no.f.vig./2-857/2010 dated 12.7.2011 (annexure-a impugned); inquiry report dated 15.1.2010 [annexure-a-1 (colly) impgned] and memorandum no.f.w.o./cshq/2009-2010 dated 20.8.2009 (annexure-a-2 impugned) as illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory and accordingly quash the same; declare that the applicant is entitled for pay, perks, continuity and seniority in service and further promotion in accordance with law with interest on the arrears of pay and perks @ 18% p.a. from the date it became due till realization thereof and .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
v.k. bali, chairman: 1. sequel to a regular departmental enquiry, ramesh kumar, the applicant herein, an inspector in delhi police, has been inflicted the punishment of forfeiture of three years approved service permanently entailing proportionate reduction in his pay. the period of suspension from 07.08.2007 till such time the order of punishment came to be passed on 28.09.2010 has been treated as period not spent on duty for all intents and purposes. the appellate authority has confirmed the order aforesaid vide order dated 04.03.2011. these are the orders which have been challenged by the applicant in this original application filed by him under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985. 2. the enquiry officer after recording statements of r. k. singh, nodal officer, bharti airtel limited (pw-1); naveen kumar bhatia (pw-2); w/asi (min.) shashi kuatter (pw-3); hc rajesh kumar (pw-4); inspr. c. k. sharma (pw-5); and harish chander joshi (pw-6), framed the following charge against the applicant: i. r. n. meena, dcp/iii bn. dap (enquiry officer) charge you inspr. (exe. ramesh kumar no.d-1/376 (pis no.16880064) that while posted at ps lajpat nagar as inspector investigation you helped the accused persons of case fir no.705/07 dated 13.7.2007 u/s 448/427/420/468/471/506/34 ipc ps lajpat nagar in grabbing the property no. k-49, lajpat nagar-iii of sh. naveen kumar bhatia. it is also alleged against you inspt. ramesh kumar no.d-1/376 that you remained in touch .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
..... the main grounds raised in this oa, in support of the aforesaid relief(s), are: that the charge framed against the applicant is vague as material particulars (such as nos. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
..... however, he was acquitted by the court by giving benefit of doubt, since the main complainant himself turned hostile. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
1. the applicant has assailed the legality, propriety and validity of the order of punishment imposed by the joint commissioner of police whereby two years' approved service of the applicant was directed to be forfeited permanently entailing reduction in his pay from rs. 3650/- to rs. 3500/- and the period of suspension from 7.2.2001 till 12.8.2001 was directed to be treated as 'not spent on duty.' 2. the factual scenario leading to this case is as follows. on 7.2.2001, a public grievance redressal squad headed by inspector y.s.negi alongwith inspector rajesh sharma, s.i. sikander roy and constable sher singh conducted a raid. during the course of surveillance, they received a secret information with regard to collection of illegal entry money from the blue line bus operators. at about 11.35 am, a blue line bus no. dl-ipa-4105 of route no. 518, tilak nagar to lodhi colony was heading towards tilak nagar. the raiding party intercepted the bus at ring road, r.k. puram, sector - 12 and asked the conductor/driver regarding collection of illegal entry money by the traffic staff. the driver and conductor told that they were asked to pay rs. 100/- per month to the traffic staff on demand, under the threat of impounding their bus if their demand is not fulfilled. inspector negi asked the conductor manoj sharma son of shri jagmal sharma to produce a sum of rs. 100/-. accordingly, he produced two currency notes of rs. 50/- denomination each. inspector negi signed those currency notes .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
1. by virtue of this oa applicant, an ex-clerk, has impugned respondents' order dated 17.8.1984, whereby in pursuance of disciplinary proceedings a major penalty of compulsory retirement has been inflicted upon him. also assailed is an order passed on 10.1.2000, whereby the request of applicant for grant of retiral benefits has been turned down.2. a brief factual matrix transpires that applicant, who was initially appointed as a lower division clerk on 27.5.1964, was granted quasi-permanency on 27.5.1968. due to some indifferences and bias of one officer, namely, shri surinder singh applicant was transferred to madras, which he had responded to by annexing his certificate of illness as well as of his wife due to tuberculosis of ovary. however, non-joining of applicant resulted in a memorandum dated 15.11.1980 issued to him under rule 14 of the ccs (cca) rules, 1965, whereby he has been alleged to have infringed the provisions of rule 3 of the ccs (conduct) rules, 1972 by remaining unauthorizedly absent and not reporting to the transferred place.3. the aforesaid enquiry when proceeded the enquiry officer (eo) vide its detailed finding did not establish the charge against applicant.4. the disciplinary authority (da) disagreed with the findings of the eo and imposed upon applicant, without affording a reasonable opportunity in violation of principles of natural justice, a major penalty of compulsory retirement. applicant, from time to time requested the respondents through his .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
..... , pw-5 acp o.p.mishra deposed that he had thrown the money in bushes, is concerned, it is a matter of common sense that when witnesses are examined after a lapse of time, they may not give a kaleidoscopic view of the whole event, as memory fades with time. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
..... he accepts the fact that there was a lower percentage in his school for class xii results and the main reason he has advanced is that the commerce teacher was transferred elsewhere by the authorities at a crucial juncture. ..... the main argument put forth by applicant is that when he was transferred to delhi in 2005 under ltr category then why in 2007 he has been again transferred to bhatinda when less than one year is left for his superannuation. ..... the main issue in this oa regarding transfer of applicant to a far off destination in the last year of his service especially when he came to delhi under ltr category. ..... the main argument of the applicant is that he had been transferred to delhi from north east under ltr category in 2005. .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
..... it has, however, been pleaded that after suspension, the applicant was transferred to sanjay gandhi memorial hospital (sgmh), delhi and was served with chargesheet under rule 14 of the ccs (cca) rules, 1965 vide order no. .....
Tag this Judgment!