Tribunal Court April 2014 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
Jitender Kumar, Rajasthan Vs. Gnct of Delhi Through Chief Secretary, N ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
V.N. Gaur, Member (A). The applicant has filed this OA in the 3rd round of litigation. He had applied for the post of TGT (Sanskrit) [Male] in the Directorate of Education, Govt. of National Capital Territory of Delhi (GNCT) in response to the Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB) advertisement no.07/2007, post code 153/07. After qualifying in the written test he was declared successful and issued an offer of appointment on 23.02.2009 and he joined the post on 19.05.2009. Subsequently, on verification of his documents it came to light that he did not possess the requisite eligibility qualification of B. Ed. on the cut off date, i.e., on 29.10.2007. Taking that as a ground as also that the applicant has concealed this material fact a show cause notice (SCN) was issued to him by R-3 on 21.09.2010 giving him three days time for submitting reply. After considering the reply submitted by the applicant his services were terminated vide order dated 05.10.2010. The applicant had e...
Ram Kumar Industries Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise and S.T
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
M.V. Ravindran, J. 1. This stay petition and appeal called out and we find that appellant has filed an application for condonation of delay. 2. Filtering out the unnecessary details, on perusal of records, we find that the appellant had filed a MISC application with the first appellate authority for granting him a certified copy of the Order-in-Appeal. This application was disposed off by the first appellate authority wherein he dismissed the application filed by passing an appealable order vide Order No.CCEA-SRT-II/SSP-97/u/s 35A (3) (Misc.Order) dt. 21.11.2012. Aggrieved by such order, the appellant preferred an appeal before the Tribunal and the Bench vide Final Order No.A 11001/WZB/AHD/2013, dt. 7.8.2013 disposed of the stay petition and appeal by directing the first appellate authority to grant a certified copy of the OIA dt. 26.2.2007. After receiving such certified copy from the appellate authority office, the appellant filed a stay petition and appeal before the Bench. The Regi...
Delhi International Airport Private Limited Vs. Delhi Electricity Regu ...
Court: Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson. 1. This is an Application filed by the Delhi International Airport Private Limited to condone the delay of 75 days in filing the Appeal as against the Impugned Order dated 31.7.2013. 2. The learned Counsel has offered the explanation for the delay through the Affidavit dated 28.11.2013 and the Additional Affidavit dated 27.1.2014 as well as the detailed Additional dated 10.3.2014. The said explanation is as follows: œ(a) The Tariff Order was passed on 31.7.2013 by the Delhi Electricity Regulatory Commission in the Application filed by the BSES Rajdhani Power Limited for the approval of True-UP for Financial year 2012-13, Review and Provisional True Up for Financial Year 2012-13 and Annual Revenue Requirement for the Distribution Business for the Financial year 2013-14. (b) In this Order, the Delhi Commission continued to treat the Appellant namely Delhi International Airport Private Limited in a separate category by applying the tariff similar t...
M/S. Loyal Textile Mills Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Central Excise, Tiru ...
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Chennai
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
1. Heard both sides and perused the records. 2. The relevant facts of the case in brief are that the appellants are engaged in the manufacture of Cotton Yarn of various varieties of Heading No.5205, Grey Cotton Fabrics of various varieties under Heading No.5208, Grey Polyester Fabrics of various varieties, Knitted Garments of Heading No.6101 and Woven Garments of Heading No.6201. They availed benefit of Notification No.30/2004-CE, dated 09.07.2004. The proviso to the said notification stipulates that in this notification shall not apply to the goods in respect of which credit of duty on inputs has been taken under the provisions of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. The appellant reversed the credit in respect of the inputs which has been used in the manufacture of the goods. There was an unutilised balance of Cenvat credit of Rs.11,55,740/- on 31.12.2004. Adjudicating authority expunged the credit of Rs.11,55,740/-, as it is hit by Rule 11(2) of Cenvat Credit Rules, 2004. 3. The learned Couns...
M/S. Fiberweb India Ltd Vs. Cceandst, Daman
Court: Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
M.V. Ravindran, J. 1. This stay petition is filed for waiver of pre-deposit of the amount of duty liability confirmed by the lower authorities, interest thereof and penalties imposed. 2. After hearing both sides on the stay petition for some time, we find that the appeal itself could be disposed of at this juncture, as the First Appellate Authority rejected/dismissed the appeal for non-compliance of pre-deposit of Rs 5 lacs ordered by him. Accordingly, we take up the appeal for disposal after disposing of the stay petition. 3. On perusal of records, we find that the First Appellate Authority has directed to deposit an amount of Rs 5 lacs for hearing and disposing the appeal on merits. It is the case of appellant that the appellant is declared as a sick company under the provision of BIFR and our attention was drawn to the said order passed by the authorities. In the first date of hearing i.e., 3.2.2012 we had directed the counsel to produce current balance sheet. On perusal of the bal...
Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd Vs. M/S. Lanco ...
Court: Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson. 1. Tamil Nadu Generation and Distribution Corporation Ltd (TANGEDCO), is the Appellant herein. 2. The Appellant has filed this Appeal as against the Impugned Order dated 15.7.2013 passed by the Tamil Nadu State Commission. 3. The State Commission in the Impugned Order while rejecting the claim of the Appellant, quashed the demand notice by holding that the demand of Rs.1,59,57,115 made by the Appellant through the demand notice dated 26.8.2010 towards the Low Power Factor Penalty, Maximum Demand Charges and Development Charges in respect of power supplied by the Appellant to the Generating Company, the Respondent during the period when the Respondents power plant was on its testing and commissioning stage was not valid in law. 4. The short facts are as follows: (a) The Appellant, the Distribution Company entered into a Power Purchase Agreement with M/s. Lanco Tanjore Power Company Limited, the Generating Company, the First Respondent for the purchase ...
M/S. Praja Cable Net Vs. M/S. Eenadu Television Pvt. Ltd.
Court: Telecom Disputes Settlement and Appellate Tribunal TDSAT
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
Aftab Alam, Chairperson. M/s Praja Cable Net, the petitioner, is a registered cable operator in the area of Proddatur, YSR District, Andhra Pradesh. It is located at 3/1495, Holmespeta, Proddatur “ 516360 and its registration number is TV/127/11-12. It claims a connectivity of 1632 customers. It is a proprietary concern and its proprietor is one Konireddy Sobha Rani, wife of Sri Shiv Chandra Reddy. The petitioner seeks a direction to the respondent, which is a broadcaster of TV channels, to enter into an Interconnect Agreement with it for supply of ETV channels in terms of regulation 3.2 of the Telecommunication (Broadcasting and Cable Services) Interconnection Regulations, 2004. According to the petitioner, it made the request for supply of signals and de-coder boxes for the respondents ETV channels but despite reminders and repeated requests the respondent declined to give its signals and the de-coder boxes to the petitioner. Hence, the petitioner is forced to come to the Tribu...
Loveyani, Delhi Vs. D.M. Spolia, Chief Secretary, Govt. of Nct of Delh ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
(Oral). V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J). 1. Even on revised call, there is no representation on behalf of the applicant. However, the learned counsel for the respondents submits that they have already served copies of the MAs on the applicant. 2. The respondents No.1 and 3 were directed to be present on 14.04.2014 since there was no representation on their behalf on 06.03.2014. Now, the respondents No.1 and 3 have filed MAs No. 994/2014 and 995/2014 respectively, seeking recalling of the order dated 06.03.2014. 3. Mrs. Rashmi Chopra, the learned counsel for respondents, submits that she was instructed to appear on behalf of respondents No.1 and 3 on the said date but inadvertently and due to mis-communication between her and her junior counsel, the case could not be represented, and seeks indulgence of this Court to recall the personal presence of respondents No.1 and 3. 4. The learned counsel further submits that the orders dated 04.07.2013 of this Tribunal in OA 3302/2012, against which th...
Dr. K.P. Poonacha, Bangalore Vs. the Union of India, Rep. by Its Secre ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J). 1. The controversy arises to be determined in the present OAs is, whether the short listing of the candidates for their further consideration for the post of Director General in the Archaeological Survey of India in revised pay band HAG Rs. 67000-79000/- is in order or not . 2. As can be abridged from the pleadings of the parties, documents on record and written submissions brought to fore by the parties the Government of India, Ministry of Culture issued Office Memorandum F.No.7-52/2012/ASI/AS dated 20.11.2012 inviting applications for appointment to the post of Director General (ibid) in Archaeological Survey of India, an attached office of the Ministry of Culture on promotion/transfer on deputation/contract basis. The eligibility conditions prescribed for appointment to the post through different modes as mentioned in the Memorandum read as under:- "Subject: Filling up the post of Director General in Archaeological Survey of India under Ministry of Culture...
U.P. Power Transmission Corporation Limited and Another Vs. M/S. Noida ...
Court: Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Decided on: Apr-03-2014
M. Karpaga Vinayagam, Chairperson. 1. U.P Power Transmission Corporation Limited is the Appellant herein. 2. The Appellant has challenged the two Orders i.e. The Main Order dated 28.11.2011 and the Review Order dated 9.5.2013 passed by the Central Electricity Regulatory Commission, in this single Appeal. 3. In filing this Appeal challenging these two Orders, there was some delay. Therefore, the Appellant has filed two separate Applications for condonation of delay of 802 days in filing the Appeal as against the Main Order dated 28.11.2011 in IA No.131 of 2014 and 307 days in Filing the Appeal as against the Review Order dated 9.5.2013 in IA No.132 of 2014. 4. The short facts are as under: (a) M/s. Noida Power Company Limited is the first Respondent. It filed a Petition in Petition No.126 of 2011 on 11.5.2011 before the Central Commission seeking for a direction to the Appellants to refund the excess transmission charges recovered by them. (b) The Appellants opposed the Application by f...
- ‹ Prev
- 11
- 12
- 13
- 14
- 15
- 16
- 17
- 19
- 20
- 21
- Next ›
- Last »