Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
1. The subject matter of challenge and the relief claimed in all the OAs being same they are being disposed of by the following order: The applicant in OA 561/2006 is presently working in the Commercial cadre of Vijayawada division of South Central Railway. While he was working as Head Commercial Clerk at Vijayawada Railway Station was informed by proceedings dated 16.2.2006 that he is responsible for the error sheet debit of Rs. 18,641/- on account of Self Printing Ticket Machine (SPTM) debits at Vijayawada Railway Station raised by the Traffic Accounts and as such a decision was taken to realise the debit amount from the salary of the applicant and the applicant was advised to submit his representation if any against the said recovery. Accordingly, the applicant submitted his representation to the 3rd respondent herein wherein he has denied his responsibility for the raised debit as mentioned therein and disagreed for the recovery of the said amount. The applicant in his representat...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Sri R. Santhanam, Member (A) ) The applicant has filed this OA aggrieved by the orders passed by the Respondents in File No. C-14011/6/2005-V and L through memorandum dated 31.3.2005 initiating disciplinary proceedings against him. 2. The facts of the case, in brief, are as follows :- The applicant was directly recruited to the Indian Revenue Services in the year 1968. He rose to the position of Commissioner of Income Tax during December, 1998. In May, 2001 he was transferred and posted as Chief Commissioner of Income Tax at Visakhapatnam and thereafter moved to Hyderabad during July, 2003. On 7.10.2004 a memorandum was issued to the applicant in F. No. C-13011/20/2004-VandL by the Respondents asking for the version of the applicant with reference to a matter relating to the release of a sum of Rs.4.39 crores in favour of the beneficiaries of H.E.H. The Nizam's Jewellery Trust . A second issue contained in the said memorandum related to the cases in which waiver of interest has been or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
ORAL ORDER : (As per Hon'ble Mr.Justice.P.Lakshmana Reddy, Vice Chairman) Heard the learned Counsel Mr.P.S.Ramachandra Murthy for the Applicant and the learned Standing Counsel Mr.M.C.Jacob for the Respondents. 2. This application is filed challenging the office orders dated 24.6.2008 and 31.7.2008 and for a direction to the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for posting from Guntakal to Secunderabad area, as sought by the applicant in his representation dated 7.7.2008. 3. The relevant facts in brief are as follows: The applicant while working as Stenographer in Guntakal Division, was involved in a criminal case registered by CBI under Section 7 of Prevention of Corruption Act. A charge sheet was filed against him before the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad. Thereafter, he was kept under suspension on 14.6.2008 by Respondent No.3 in view of the pendency of criminal case registered against him. While so, the respondents passed the impugned order dated 24.6.2008 revo...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
SHRI HRIDAY NARAIN, MEMBER (ADMN.) The present OA was filed by the applicant with a prayer to call for the records pertaining to the Memos dated 23.2.2004 and 17.4.2006 issued by the 5th Respondent; letter dated 17.12.2007 and 1.5.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent and to set aside the letter dated 1.5.2008 as illegal and direct the respondents to allot the post of Office Superintendent Grade-I to the applicant in Mechanical Department with effect from 23.8.2001 and post the applicant in any of the administrative office functioning in Headquarters office, Divisional offices of Secunderabad and Hyderabad of South Central Railway functioning in Secunderabad, owing to the hearing impairment of the applicant and his wife's employment in Hyderabad, with all consequential benefits like fixation of pay, arrears of pay and other allowances. 2. The brief facts of the case, as stated by the applicant in the OA, are that the applicant, who belongs to ST community, was appointed as Diesel Assistant...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
1. This is an application filed by the widow of the deceased Railway Goods Driver seeking directions to respondents to consider sanction of compassionate allowance to her from the date of removal of her husband from service. The applicant's husband, late Syed Ghouse served the Railways as Goods Driver for a period of more than 32 years. On 27.8.1978 while he was driving the Goods Train there was a derailment of 16 goods wagons on arrival to KRA Railway Station. Disciplinary inquiry was initiated against the husband of the applicant, and a criminal case was also registered by Railway Police and filed charge sheet before XII Metropolitan Magistrate for Railways, Secunderabad as CC 155/1981. Disciplinary proceedings were concluded and the applicant's husband was found guilty of the charge framed against him and was dismissed from service on 22.2.80. Thereafter, the applicant's husband was acquitted on 28.6.84 by the Criminal Court holding that there was no evidence to prove the alleged n...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
1. The present OA has been filed praying for setting aside the Memo dated 4.10.2006 in pursuance of which the 3rd respondent has proposed to hold an inquiry against the applicant in terms of Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965.2. The brief facts of the case here are that the applicant joined the Department of Central Excise as Inspector on 1.8.1977 and he was promoted as Superintendent, Central Excise on 1.8.1992. While he was working as Inspector, Customs in the Unaccompanied Baggage Unit (UB Unit) in Aircargo Complex, Begumpet, Hyderabad, Central Bureau of Investigation, Hyderabad conducted certain checks on 2.5.1992 and in pursuance of the subsequent investigations, a charge sheet was filed by the CBI in the Court of the Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad, vide C.C. No. 17 of 1998 for launching prosecution of the applicant along with Shri D.V. Subba Rao, Superintendent, Customs. However, after the full trial, the Court, vide or...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
R. Santhanam, Member (A) ) This application has been filed praying for the following relief :- "(i) to call for the relevant records from R-1, R-2 and R-3 leading to the issue of the following impugned orders, removing him from service, viz., a) Memo No. BED/3-337 dated 31.7.2002 / 2.8.2002 of R-1 (Annexure-A-I) removing him from service; b) Memo No. ST/13-108/1/2005 dated 30.8.2005 of R-3 (Annexure-A.II) rejecting his appeal; c) No.BO./Koligam/94 dated 22.1.94 of R-2 (Annexure A.VI) revising the working hours of the B.O.; d) Lr.No.43-34/79-Pen dated 17.4.1979 of R-5 (Annexure-A VII and Memo No. ST/14-2-108/06 dated 28.3.2007 (Annexure-A.LXXXII) of R-4 rejecting his revision petition" (Added as per order dated 21-6-07 in M.A.185/2007) and quash the same as illegal, arbitrary, unjust, malafide and in violation of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of INdia and consequently direct the Respondents to reinstate him in service as the GDS BPM, Koligam B.O. and ii) to direct R-5 to m...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ29CAT
1. This application is filed by the applicant seeking for declaration that denial of protection of pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000 and the protection of basic pay of Rs. 4875/- as on 23.1.1998 to him is illegal, arbitrary, unconstitutional and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and the impugned action of the respondents is violative of Section 47 of the "Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995" and that the said action is also violative of instructions in Serial Circular No. 68/ 97, Circular letter No. P(R) 347/PDA dated 15.4.97, Copy of Board's letter No. E(LL) 96/AT/PDA/1 dated 21.2.1997 of the Railway Board and to quash the impugned letter dated 28.11.2000 issued by the 4th respondent as illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional and to declare that he is entitled for absorption in the alternative job on medical decategorisation in the scale of Rs. 4500-7000 with pay protection in his basic pay of Rs. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2005)(3)SLJ79CAT
1. The applicant filed the present O.A. seeking for declaration that the letter dated 20.6.2003 issued by the respondent No. 3 is illegal, arbitrary and unconstitutional by holding that he is entitled to be placed in a supernumerary post created in the scale of pay of Rs. 825-1200/- 2750-4400/- for the period from 25.6.1996 to 27.3.1997 and for pay and allowances for the said period at the same rate he was drawing prior to medical decategorisation in the said scale of pay; and for absorption in the alternative post/grade in the scale of pay of Rs. 825-1200 / 2750-4450/- with effect from 28.3.1997 consequent on his medical decategorisation as per the provisions of Section 47(1) of the Persons with Disabilities Act, 1995 (for short, the "Act 1995") and also for grant of first stage financial upgradation under ACP Scheme to the scale of pay of Rs. 3050-4450/-with effect from 1.9.1998 along with arrears of pay and allowances, with all consequential benefits such as, arrears of pay and all...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ339CAT
1. The applicant has filed this O.A. for issuing a direction to the respondents to issue him posting orders forthwith in a cadre post and declare the action of the respondents in not giving the applicant posting orders as violative of Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India and contrary to Rules 6 and 7 of All India Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954, and also contrary to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 1988(7) SLR 697. The applicant has also prayed for a further direction upon the respondents to consider his claim for permanent/long term deputation in inter-cadre transfer to Karnataka State as per the provisions of Indian Administrative Service (Cadre) Rules, 1954, and pass any other order as deemed fit and proper.2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is an IAS Officer of Andhra Pradesh cadre of 1979 batch and belongs to SC Community. It has been stated by the applicant that at the initial stage of his career, he was posted to...
Tag this Judgment!