Tribunal Court May 2014 Judgments
Krishan Kant Singh, Uttar Pradesh and Another Vs. National Ganga River ...
Court: National Green Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-31-2014
M.S. Nambiar (Judicial Member): 1. The Application is filed under Section 14 of the National Green Tribunal Act seeking directions to the respondents to stop releasing harmful effluent from Simbhaoli Sugar mill and Distillery and Gopal Ji Dairy (Respondents no. 7 and 8 respectively) into Simbhaoli Drain and finally into the River Ganga and also for a direction to the Central Pollution Control Board (Respondent no.3) to assess the pollution done by Respondents 7 and 8 and for restoration of the area and other reliefs by the Applicants, a person and an organization working in the field of environment, jointly. The case of the Applicants is that respondent No. 7 is an industry of Sugar Mills and Distillery, established in 1933 and 1943 respectively. They are now operating three sugar mills and three distilleries in the State of Uttar Pradesh and the total crushing capacity is 20,100 TCD and the unit at Simbhaoli alone is having a crushing capacity of 9,500 TCD and they are discharging unt...
Tag this Judgment!Torrent Power Limited, Vs. Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission
Court: Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Decided on: May-30-2014
Rakesh Nath, Technical Member. 1. Appeal nos. 147, 148 and 150 of 2013 have been filed by Torrent Power Ltd. in respect of Ahmedabad distribution, Surat distribution and generation activities respectively. Appeal no. 147 of 2013 has been filed against the order dated 16.4.2013 passed by the Gujarat Electricity Regulatory Commission (œState Commission?) for truing up the financials for the FY 2011-12 and determination of tariff for the FY 2013-14 for the Appellant for Ahmedabad distribution. Appeal no. 148 of 2013 has been filed by the Appellant against the order dated 16.4.2013 passed by the State Commission for truing up the financials for the FY 2011-12 and determination of tariff for FY 2013-14 in respect of Surat distribution. Appeal no. 150 of 2013 has been filed by the Appellant against the order dated 16.4.2013 passed by the State Commission for truing up for FY 2011-12 and determination of tariff for FY 2013-14 for Appellants generation activities. 2. Since the issues inv...
Tag this Judgment!Sorabh Mathur, Cantt Vs. Union of India Through Secretary (Defence) Mi ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-30-2014
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 against the posting order dated 3.1.2014 (Annexure A-1) whereby he is posted from CE (AF) WAC Palam Zone to PM MAP Kapurthala. 2. Mr. Vinay K. Garg, learned counsel for applicant submitted that the applicant is working in Military Engineer Services (MES) as Superintending Engineer and is an officer of the level of Director, thus the respondents are not justified in transferring him as Project Manager in Married Accommodation Project (MAP). According to him, the post of Project Manager, Kapurthala is meant to be manned by an Executive Engineer and not by an officer of Director level. To buttress his submission, he referred to rationalization of MS and E1B VAC dated 4.6.2012 (Annexure A-2), letter dated 17.11.2003 (Annexure A-6), letter dated 22.4.2010 (Annexure A-7) and the table describing the duties of CWE (Annexure A-8). 3. Learned counsel for applicant further submi...
Tag this Judgment!Mirza Hadi Hasan, New Delhi Vs. South Delhi Municipal Corporation, Thr ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-30-2014
A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J): On receipt of the requisition from Directorate of Education (Municipal Corporation of Delhi), Delhi Subordinate Services Selection Board (DSSSB), issued advertisement no. 07/07 and 08/07 inviting applications for the post of Assistant Teacher/Teacher (Primary) under post code No. 165-166/07. As per the provisions contained in the Recruitment Rules notified on 08.05.2006 and 13.07.2006 the maximum age for the post was reduced from 32 (Male)/42 (Female) to 20-27 years. The cut off date for submission of the application was 29.10.2007. The Recruitment Rules notified on 13.07.2007 were challenged before Honble Delhi High Court. In the meantime, the examination for the post was held on 15-16/06/2008 by the Board. The Honble High Court of Delhi disposed of the petition on 28.08.2008 with the following order:- To conclude the language and marks criteria (namely passing of Hindi subject at primary level and minimum 50% marks in Senior Secondary Examination) are uphel...
Tag this Judgment!Harsh Singh, Nagpur and Others Vs. Union of India Through Its Secretar ...
Court: Tribunal
Decided on: May-30-2014
Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A). MA-1378 of 2014 1. This application has been filed for filing one application. For the reasons stated therein, the same is allowed. OA-1378/2014 The applicants of this OA are candidates who successfully cleared the Civil Services Examination, 2012 and joined the National Academy of Direct Taxes (NADT), Nagpur for induction training as 67th Batch of Indian Revenue Service (IRS) since December 2013. They are aggrieved by the decision of the respondents in not permitting them to write the Civil Services Examination again in 2014 and also not granting them Extra Ordinary Leave for preparing for the same. They have, therefore, filed this OA seeking the following reliefs:- i. That the present application maybe allowed and impugned order dated 29.03.2014 and 07/08.04.2014 be set aside. ii. That the respondents be directed to grant permission to applicants to apply and take CSE-2013 and further be granted Extra Ordinary Leave asked for preparing for such examinatio...
Tag this Judgment!Mahavir Singh, Delhi Vs. Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-30-2014
V. Ajay Kumar, Member (J). 1. The applicant, who is working in the substantive post of Peon and in the post of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) on ad hoc basis, filed the present OA, seeking the following reliefs: 8.1. Direct the Respondents to amend the seniority list and place the applicant above Shri Lohre Ram in the seniority list since the applicant is senior to him. 8.2.Direct the Respondents to confirm the applicant on the post of LDC with effect from 24.10.2000 i.e. the date from which his junior was confirmed by the Respondent. 8.3.Direct the Respondent to consider applicant for promotion to the post of UDC with effect from 27.04.2010 i.e. the date from which his junior was promoted to the post of UDC with all consequential benefits. 8.4. Levy exemplary cost on the respondent for their inaction, and deliberate unwanted delay in implementing C.A.T.s orders which has caused immense mental agony to the applicant. 8.5. Grant any other relief which the Court may think just and proper und...
Tag this Judgment!Anil Kumar, Irs Vs. Union of India Through the Secretary, New Delhi an ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-30-2014
1. As has been captioned in the Original Application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985, the applicant is direct recruit of the 1986 batch of IRS and joined as Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in the year 1986. He got promotion as Deputy Commission (IT), Joint Commissioner (IT), Additional Commissioner (IT) and Commissioner of Income Tax in the years 1990, 1999, 2000 and 2007 respectively. When he was sought to be transferred on promotion to Kochi, he questioned the same by filing OA 332/2007 before the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal. According to the applicant, the OA was decided in his favour and in the Writ Petition preferred against the order of the Tribunal before Honble High Court is still pending. When in terms of the order No. 106/2013 issued on 14.06.2013, the applicant was transferred from Mumbai (CCA) to Chennai (CCA), he filed the present OA under section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 praying :- 1. This Honble Tribunal m...
Tag this Judgment!Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Co. Ltd Vs. Maharashtra Ele ...
Court: Appellate Tribunal for Electricity APTEL Appellate Jurisdiction
Decided on: May-30-2014
Rakesh Nath, Tehnical Member. 1. This Appeal has been filed by Maharashtra State Electricity Distribution Company Ltd. challenging the order dated 16.8.2012 passed by Maharashtra Electricity Regulatory Commission (œState Commission?) regarding True up for FY 2010-11, ARR for the FYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 and Tariff determination for FY 2012-13. 2. The Appellant has raised the following issues in the Appeal. i) Creation of separate category for Government owned and managed hospitals and education institution: The Appellant in its petition had proposed to introduce a new consumer sub-category within Low Tension/High tension non-domestic (commercial) category consisting of all Government owned and operated educational institutions including higher educational institutes but excluding Government aided educational institutes. Similar approach was proposed for Government owned and operated hospitals. However, the State Commission rejected the plea of the Appellant on flawed appreciation ...
Tag this Judgment!NitIn Kumar Sahu Vs. the Union of India Through the Secretary Ministry ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-30-2014
1. The applicant joined the service as Inspector, Group C officer in Central Excise (Delhi Zone) on 22.12.2009. The Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC) issued a circular No.A-22015/19/2006-Ad.III.A dated 27.3.2009 providing for inter-commissionerate transfer (ICT) of Groups B, C and D posts on spouse ground without loss of seniority. The circular is reproduced hereinbelow:- Subject: Ban on Inter-Commissionerate Transfers (ICT) in Group-B; C and D Posts, Relaxation on Spouse Ground. I am directed to refer to the Boards Circular F. No. A-22015/3/2004-Ad.IIIA dated 19.02.2004 as modified vide letter dated 09.03.2004; vide which the Inter-Commissionerate Transfers of Groups B, c and D officers were banned. Although the term used was Inter-Commissionerate Transfers, the ban was actually confined to transfers from one Cadre Controlling Authority to another. There was no ban on transfers amongst the Commissionerates having common cadre, where no loss of seniority was involved, as was c...
Tag this Judgment!M.S. Shekhawat (inspector), New Delhi and Another Vs. Commissioner of ...
Court: Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench New Delhi
Decided on: May-30-2014
A.K. Bhardwaj, Member (J): Mr. Satyendra Garg, Joint Commissioner of Police Traffic, Delhi issued a common Show Cause Notice No.2576-78/HAP-T (D-II) dated 28.02.2011 calling upon the applicants herein as also Inspector Ashok Saini (D/3433), Inspector Ved Prakash (D/890) and Inspector Prashant ( D/3281) to show cause as to why their conduct for allowing the blue Line buses to ply without permit on route from Najafgarh to Inder Lok be not censured. In his reply to said notice, Mr. M.S. Shekhawat, the applicant in OA no.3007/2013 submitted that he took over the charge of TI/SBC on 09.11.2010 and soon after the study of topography of Sadar Bazaar Circle, he briefed and directed the ZOs and subordinate personnel to take proper traffic precautions and not involve or connive with the operation of unauthorized vehicles as well as running of blue line buses without valid permit. According to him, he made sincere efforts and took positive approach to launch such drive which resulted prosecution ...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- 8
- 9
- 10
- 11
- Next ›
- Last »