Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Dr. K.B.S. Rajan, Judicial Member 1. The admitted facts in this case, required for adjudication of the claim of the applicant are that the applicant was initially engaged as Extra Departmental Agent and he served in that capacity for nearly 25 years and thereafter, against the vacancy of Group D post, on the basis of seniority, in the respective quota, he was appointed as a Group D employee on a regular basis w.e.f. 13th of October 2000. He continue in the said post till his superannuation on 31st of May 2010. The period of qualifying service for the purpose of grant of pension in his case fell short by about five months for full ten years (and one month and 12 days for 9 years and nine months) consequent to which, the applicant became disentitled to the grant of pension. It is the case of the applicant that had the Department acted timely in filling up the vacancy of Group D posts immediately on its arising, the applicant would have been appointed as a Group D employee in 1999 itself ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Dr. K.B.S. Rajan, Judicial Member 1. Applicant is the son of late V. Korukutty, who unfortunately expired on 02.03.2007 while working in the Customs preventive Division, Kozhikode, as Havildar. The deceased was survived by his wife and two children. The mother of the applicant made a representation vide Annexure A-1 dated 26-03-2007 for a suitable employment on compassionate grounds for her son. The applicant himself has furnished an application vide Annexure A-2. The applicant as at his credit a bachelor's degree in Business Administration. He also possesses a post graduate diploma certificate issued by the Centre for Development of Advances Computing, Pune. As no communication was received by the applicant in respect of his compassionate appointment, periodically he renewed his request before the concerned authorities. By the communication dated 28th of April 2010 the respondents have rejected his case. The reasons given for rejection of the case as contained in the penultimate parag...
Tag this Judgment!Court : SEBI Securities and Exchange Board of India or Securities Appellate Tribunal SAT
P. K. Malhotra (Oral) 1. This order will dispose of two Appeals No. 169 and 170 of 2012. 2. The appellant before us in these two appeals is a registered sub-account of a foreign institutional investor and carrying on its business in India of making investment in Indian securities market. The Securities and Exchange Board of India (for short the Board) is carrying out investigations into the alleged market manipulation using global depositories receipt issue and in the process passed an ex-parte ad-interim order on September 21, 2011 restraining the appellant alongwith some other entities from dealing in the securities or instruments with Indian securities, in any manner, until further orders. The said order was modified by the Board on January 23, 2012 whereby the appellant was permitted to sell shares and deposit sale proceeds in a separate bank account with the permission of the Board. By its letter dated April 17, 2012 the appellant approached the Board seeking its permission to imm...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL
M. KARPAGA VINAYAGAM, CHAIRPERSON, J. 1. “Whether the Haryana State Commission has the jurisdiction to go into the dispute with regard to validity of the Notice of Termination of the PPA issued by the Appellant to PTC (R3) raised in the Petition filed by the Haryana Power (R2) seeking for the enforcement of the PPA entered into between the Appellant and PTC (R3) to which the Haryana Power (R2) was not the party”? 2. This is the question posed for consideration in this Appeal. 3. The short facts are as follows;- a) M/s. Lanco Budhil Hydro Power Private Limited (LANCO Budhil), is the Appellant herein. It is a Generating Company which has been authorised by the Government of Himachal Pradesh to establish and operate a 2x35 MW Hydro Power Project in Himachal Pradesh. b) Haryana State Electricity Regulatory Commission (State Commission) is the First Respondent. c) Haryana Power Generation Corporation Limited (Haryana Power), a generating company owned by the Government of Harya...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi
ORDER Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Member (A): 1. OA No.4586/2011 with MA No.385/2012 was heard on 12.04.2012 and reserved for orders. OAs No. 2857/2011, 2858/2011 and 2961/2011 were also heard the very next day on 13.04.2012 and reserved for orders. The subject matter of these four cases being the same, and this being the third round of adjudication before this Tribunal, they are being disposed of through a common order. 2. The issue in these four cases is that if the applicant against a particular advertisement for the post of a Teacher, which prescribes a specific qualification of Bachelor’s Degree in a subject to have been obtained before the cut off date, (which is normally the last date for filing of applications by any candidate), with studies in the relevant subject (for teaching which the application has been filed) having been prescribed to have been included in all the three years of the course of studies of the prescribed Bachelor’s Degree, can be considered to be eligible...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Dr. K.B.S. Rajan, Judicial Member 1. The legal issue involved in these cases being one and the same, all these cases are dealt with through this common order. 2. The applicants in all these O.As were initially engaged as G.D.S. and later on, either by way of qualifying in the departmental examination, or by way of promotion/appointment, they were inducted into the regular service as group D/post man and have served till the date of their superannuation on attaining the age of 60 years. For the purpose of drawal of pension, the minimum required regular service is 10 years. However, in all the above cases, the applicants fell short of the requisite minimum years of service by some period. The details of their entry into regular service, dates of superannuation and deficiency in regular service to qualify for pension are all given in the statement appended below : OA No.NameEntry in Regular Group D post/as PostmanDate of Superannu actionDeficiency in service for pension (9 years and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TDSAT
P.K. Rastogi, Member The petitioners have filed this petition for supply of signals of the channels of the respondent no. 2 to the petitioner against the payment made by them to the respondents. In the alternate, the petitioner has requested to direct the respondent to refund the amount paid by it alongwith interest. 2. The petitioners have submitted that the petitioner No. 1 is a Deed Writer by profession. His son petitioner No. 2 being unemployed was assisting him in the work of documentation. As the petitioner No. 2 was unemployed but a qualified Civil Engineer, petitioner No. 1 wanted to set up an independent business for his son petitioner No. 2. The respondent No. 1 was officiating as authorized Distributor of ESPN and Star Sports channels owned by respondent No. 2 for down south Tamil Nadu. On the insistence of the Respondent No. 1 to invest in the business of cable T.V. networking and avail decoder for enabling the same in Surandai Town and nearby area, the petitioners decided...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
ORAL ORDER Per Archana Wadhwa (for the Bench): 1. The issue required to be decided in the present appeal is as under:- (i) Whether the beneficiation of coal activity carried out by the appellant is covered by the category of Business auxiliary services, thus making the appellant liable to pay Service Tax. (ii) Whether the activity of loading /unloading of the coal carried out by the appellant for bringing the coal into washery fall under the category of cargo handling services. (iii) Whether the show cause notice issued on 7.9.06 for the period 16.8.02 to 31.3.06 is barred by limitation. 2. The Commissioner vide his impugned order has confirmed the demand of Rs.16,53,19,593 (Rupees Sixteen crore fiftythree lakh nineteen thousand five hundred nintythree only) against the appellant by holding that the activity of washing the coal falls under the Business auxiliary services. Another amount of Rs. 85,97,773/- (Rupees Eightyfive lakh ninetyseven thousand seven hundred seventythree o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TDSAT
P.K. Rastogi, Member This petition has been filed as the respondent has rejected the application of the petitioner for supply of signals to its network. The petitioner is a Multi System Operator in Amritsar and the respondent is a broadcaster as defined under the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulation, 2004. The petitioner has prayed for following reliefs: (i) Declare the action of rejecting the application for affiliation/request for grant of signals as wrong and illegal; (ii) Direct the respondent to sign Subscription Agreement with the petitioner, provide TV Signals to petitioner‟s Cable TV Network and also direct the respondent to supply of decoders boxes of channels of Bouquet-IA comprising of Colors, IBN 7, CNBC Awaz, IBN Lokmat and Bouquet- 2 comprising of MTC, Nick, VHI, CNBC TV and CNN IBN to the petitioner on reasonable terms and conditions. 2. The petitioner has submitted that it had sent a letter to the respondent in the year 2...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Delhi
Per Archana Wadhwa (for the Bench): 1. After hearing both sides, I find that officer of Customs (Prev) containing 15 bags of Cut betel nut on 1.9.09 lying with the parcel office, Railway Station, Mugal Sarai for further investigation. Said goods were examined by officers on 4.9.09 and were found to be 1200 Kg. of betel nut totally valued of Rs.60,000/-. The officers obtained a trade opinion on 5.9.09 which revealed that the seized betel nut were of foreign origin. Further, inasmuch as nobody claimed the ownership of the said betel nuts, a show cause notice was issued to the ‘whomsoever it may concern’ proposing to confiscate the seized betel nuts and to impose penalty. 2. Subsequently, a letter dated 21.12.09 was addressed by the appellant to the Assistant Commissioner owning the said 15 bags of supari. It was also submitted that the same is a produce of West Bengal and were duly assessed by market commodity. In response to the said letter, the appellants were summoned to ...
Tag this Judgment!