Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
(Oral) BY HONOURABLE MRS. SHYAMA DOGRA, MEMBER (J) 1. Heard the learned counsel for the parties. 2. The learned counsel for the respondents has raised a preliminary objection that before coming to this Court, the applicant has not exhausted all the statutory remedies by filing an appeal before the Appellate Authority 3. In reply to this, it is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that his grievance is only with regard to an amount, which has been ordered to be recovered from him, has already been deposited by Sh. Roshan Lal, the main accused, therefore, he is not liable to pay any amount as has been ordered by the disciplinary authority. 4. He has referred to this fact in para 4.5 of the O.A. He has also pointed out that this fact is also reflected in the impugned order Annexure A-1 (Page-31). 5. Keeping in view this factual position as above, we find it appropriate to give directions to the applicant to file an elaborate appeal before the Appellate Authority within a per...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
Honourable Mrs. Promilla Issar, Member (A) The applicant has filed this OA praying for the following reliefs:- “i) The relevant record may kindly be called for to see the circumstances under which the temporary service rendered by the applicant for the period from 21.9.1974 to 26.7.1978 has not been counted as qualifying service for the purpose of calculating pensionary and other retiral benefits. ii) That the order of the respondents (Annexure A-10) in not counting the temporary service for the purpose of pensionary benefits may be quashed with a direction to the respondents to count the period of temporary service as a part of qualifying service of the applicant for working out her retiral benefits. iii) That a further direction is prayed for issuing the revised PPO and to pay the applicant the difference in amount which shall now be worked out on the basis of revised qualifying service and revised retiral benefits payable to the applicant.” 2. The facts as projected by t...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
Honourable Mrs. Promilla Issar, Member (A) The applicant has filed this OA praying for the following relief:- “Direct the respondents to release the amount of Rs. 2,80,439/- being the payment of commutation value which is pending since 31.7.2010 along with interest @ 18% per annum.” 2. The facts as projected by the applicant are that he joined the Army in October, 1981 and took voluntary retirement on 31.7.2010. He has stated that he was granted pension vide PPO no. C/Misc/19121/2010. dated 29.12.2010 which was communicated to him vide letter dated 6.1.2011. As per Column 23 and 24 of the PPO, he was to be paid the capitalized value of pension at Rs. 6555/-, without deducting from his pension the commutation value per month. The grievance of the applicant is that an amount of Rs. 2,80, 439/- as commutation of pension, which was due from 31.7.2010, has not been paid to him and he is suffering a huge loss, including interest thereon. Hence this OA. 3. The respondents have sta...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
HONOURABLE MRS. SHYAMA DOGRA, MEMBER (J):- 1. This OA is directed against the impugned orders dated 17.3.2010 (Annexure A-1) and 8.11.2007 (Annexure A-2), whereby the case of the applicant had been rejected for his appointment on compassionate grounds with further prayer to the issuance of the directions to the Respondents to consider his case as soon as the vacancy is available with the Respondents as he alleged that his case had already been approved and found fit for such appointment. 2. The applicant’s father died in harness while working as Motor Lorry Driver on 5.6.2002 after rendering more than ten years of serve. At the time of his death, he was 50 years of age and had ten years of more service. He had left behind no source of income, but, liabilities of his widow and three sons (consisting of two minors) and his old-aged mother of 85 years. 3. Initially, the mother of the applicant had applied for compassionate appointment of his major son, i.e. the present applicant and...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
Honourable Mrs. Promilla Issar, Member (A) The applicant has filed this OA praying for the following reliefs:- “i) Impugned orders dated 9.2.2010, 28.7.2010 and 30.6.2011 whereby request/representation made by the applicant for grant of minimum basic pay and allowances of the post of Principal for the period from 31.7.2006 to 26.10.2009, the applicant was given the charge of the post of Principal in addition to his own duties, was rejected, be quashed/set aside. ii) Directions may be issued to the respondents for extending benefit of the judgments in similar cases, rendered by this Tribunal (A-17, A-18 and A-19). iii) Directions may be issued to the respondents to consider his claim for grant of pay and allowances of the post of Principal for the period from 31.7.2006 to 26.10.2009 when he was given the charge of the post and he had been continuously performing the duties of the said post, he being fully eligible with all the consequential benefits.” 2. The facts, as projec...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
(ORAL) HONOURABLE MRS. SHYAMA DOGRA, JM The facts, as projected by the applicant, are that a charge-sheet dated 30.9.2001 (Annexure A-1) was issued to the applicant with the allegations that she committed certain misconduct on account of lack of supervision and not performing her duties as Drawing and Disbursing Officer resulting in financial loss during her tenure in the School w.e.f. 6.11.2000. The charge-sheet was served upon the applicant on the date of her retirement on 30.9.2003 and only provisional pension was released to her, while withholding other dues. 2. The applicant filed an O.A.No. 328-CH-2006 which was disposed of on 1.4.2008 holding that the charge-sheet was issued to the applicant not for any misconduct but due to her act of bringing facts of embezzlement against some employees to the notice of superior authorities. Thus, the charge sheet was quashed with a direction to the respondents to release benefits to the applicant with usual interest. 3. The respondent filed R...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
(ORAL). HONOURABLE MR. SANJEEV KAUSHIK, MEMBER (J): Both these OAs are disposed of by this common order as common question of facts and law are involved in these OAs. For the sake of convenience, facts are noticed from O.A.NO.985/PB/2011 (Parshotam Lal and Ors. Versus Union of India and Ors.). 2. The applicants have filed the present O.A under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking the following reliefs:- “i) After perusal, this Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to quash the order dated 26.2.2009(Annexure A-1) with the further directions that the petitioners are entitled to the first financial upgradation in the pay scale of Rs.3050-4590 and second financial upgradation in the pay scale of Rs.4000-6000 on completion of their 12/24 years of service and they be further held entitled to the corresponding revised pay scale of Rs.52300-20200 + grade pay of Rs.1900/- and Rs.5200-20200+grade payoff Rs.2400/- as the second financial upgradation; ii) the respond...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
(ORAL) HONOURABLE MRS.SHYAMA DOGRA, MEMBER (J) The applicants have filed this Original Application under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking quashing of the order dated 28.7.2011 (Annexure A-4) to the extent the respondents have denied benefit of judgment in O.A.No. 156/JK/2009 dated 19.1.2010 titled Ashok Kumar Vs. Union of India and Others, as upheld by Hon’ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in CWP No. 12894 of 200 decided on 23.7.2010 (A-2) and Hon’ble Apex Court in SLP No. CC 7278 of 2011 (Annexure A-3). 2. Skipping superfluities, it may be stated that in the list of Inspectors as on 1.1.2010, the applicants are placed at Sr. No. 227, 242, 230, 240, 234, 245, 243, 244 and 241 respectively whereas their junior is at Sr. no. 251. The applicants got promotion as Inspector and were granted pay scale of Rs.6500-10500 w.e.f. 1.1.1996 and their junior too was placed in the same pay scale w.e.f. 1.1.1996. As on 19.4.2007, the applicants were getting pay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
(ORAL). HONOURABLE MR. KHUSHIRAM, MEMBER (A): Applicants who were engaged on daily wage basis on 3.5.1990, 10.7.1990 and 13.2.1991 respectively were granted temporary status with effect from 1.9.1993 vide order dated 15.12.1993 ( Annexure A-4) in view of scheme framed by the DoPT known as Casual Labourers, Grant of Temporary Status (Regularization) Scheme, 1993. As the applicants are working for the last 20-22 years without any interruption, but their services have not been regularized despite availability of posts and thus they are likely to retire without regularization and they will not get any pensionary benefits despite having served the respondent department for more than thirty years. The Apex Court in the case of Secretary State of Karnataka versus Uma Devi decided on 10.4.2006 had directed the Government of India to regularize those employees as a one time measure, who have completed ten years service on that date even though they were not appointed as per rules and have conti...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
HONOURABLE MRS. PROMILLA ISSAR, MEMBER (A) Since both the applicants have common cause of action and the relief prayed for is also the same, they are allowed to file Joint Application. 2. The applicants have filed this OA praying for the following relief:- “The respondents be directed to consider the case of the applicants sympathetically and grant them an opportunity enabling them to submit their options for electing pension scheme and avail the benefits under the Pension Scheme.” 3. The projected case of the applicants is that they had joined service in the M/s Semi-Conductor Complex Limited (SCL) different dates, and had opted for voluntary retirement on 7.4.2006 and 27.4.2006 respectively. Consequently, they were retired voluntarily w.e.f. 1.5.2006. Thereafter on 16.6.2006, the Semi-Conductor Complex Ltd. was wound up and a newly registered Society, namely, Semi-Conductor Laboratory (SCL Society) was registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1956 on November 8, 2...
Tag this Judgment!