Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Ms. K. Noorjehan, Administrative Member: 1. The applicant is challenging his transfer from Tirur Head Office to Ponnani Head Office. 2. The facts as narrated by the applicant are, that he commenced his service as Postal Assistant in 1981 in Tirur division under the third respondent. After working in various offices, he was posted as Marketing Executive of Tirur Division (ME for short) with Headquarters at Tirur Head Office in Jun 2003. While so, R-2 viz, the PMG northern region ordered to transfer those MEs, who have completed more than 4 years as ME, to their substantive posts in the post offices (Annexure A-2). The applicant was relieved of his duties as ME and he joined as Postal Assistant in Tirur Head Office in obedience of the orders issued at Annexure A3. After joining at Tirur head office, on the instructions of the second respondent, the third respondent modified the earlier transfer order and transferred him to Ponnani Head Office. The applicant immediately submitted his Anne...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member: 1. The applicant, an Assistant Accounts Officer under the Controller of Defence Accounts, was charge sheeted on 10.1.2007 for a major penalty under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, in connection with certain irregularities allegedly committed by him while on deputation to the Lakshadweep Administration during the period from 26.8.2002 to 2.11.2004 on the recommendation of the CBI and in consultation with the CVC. The recommendation of the DPC in its meeting held on 15.6.2009 for his promotion to the grade of Accounts Officer for the year 2009-2010 was put in the sealed cover. The disciplinary authority i.e. C.D.A., Chennai dropped all charges against the applicant after considering his defence statement vide order dated 15.1.2010. The findings of the subsequent DPCs in respect of the applicant held on 10.5.2010 and 12.5.2011 against vacancy years of 2010- 2011 and 2011-2012 respectively where also kept in the sealed cover. Meanwhile hundreds of...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member: 1. In the office of the Official Liquidator attached to different High Courts, there are two categories of employees viz. (i) Government employees who are appointed against the sanctioned posts in the Department of Company Affairs, in accordance with the procedure prescribed in the rules framed under proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution and the doctrine of equality enshrined in Articles 14 and 16 and are paid salaries and allowances from the Consolidated Fund of India and (ii) the persons employed by the Official Liquidators pursuant to the sanction accorded by the concerned Court under Rule 308 of the 1959 Rules, which were framed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Section 643 of the companies Act, 1956, who are described as Company Paid Staff (CPS) being paid out of the funds of the Companies. As per Annexure A-1 Scheme dated 01.10.1999, the CPS are to be absorbed against 50% of the existing and future vacancies in the direct recruitment...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member: 1. These O.As, having common facts and issues, were heard together and are disposed of by this common order. 2. The applicants in these O.As have been denied permission to participate in the examination held on 09.09.2012 for promotion to the post of Postal Assistants/Sorting Assistants on the ground that they fall short of 3 years regular service in Pay Band-I of Rs. 5200-20200 with Grade Pay of Rs. 2000/- as on 01.01.2012 in the cadre of Postman. The applicants in O.A. No. 586/2012 have sought following reliefs: (i) To declare that the applicants 1 to 3 are entitled to get promoted to the cadre of Postman retrospectively with effect from the date of their due turn and entitlement against the vacancies of the year 2006/2007 and to get full service benefits from the respective dates of their promotions and also are entitled to reckon their qualifying service for taking the departmental examination for promotion to the post of Postal Assistant sl...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member: 1. For unauthorized absence in the year 2005 after conducting an ex-parte inquiry the applicant a Deputy CTI, Southern Railway, Kollam, was removed from service with effect from 10.1.2007. On appeal dated 20.2.2007 the punishment of removal from service was modified as reduction of pay by two stages in the pay band of Rs. 9300-32800/- plus GP Rs. 4200/- for a period of 36 months without the effect of postponing future increments vide order dated 14.9.2010. Without considering his revision petition dated 12.10.2010, notice of proposal for enhancement of punishment under Rule 25(I)(v)(b) of Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968 dated 5.4.2011 was issued. OA No. 472 of 2011 was disposed of with a direction to raise all the contentions of the applicant before the Revisional Authority. Subsequently, the revisional authority enhanced the punishment of reduction to lower post as TE in Pay Band Rs. 5200-20200/- with Rs. 1900/- (GP) on pay...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Dr. K.B.S. Rajan, Judicial Member: 1. The applicant is functioning as GDS in Kollam Division and was permitted to appear in the departmental examination held on 20th December 2009 for promotion to the post of Postman. As per the rules, the qualifying mark was 45% in each paper. The applicant submits that she had secured 44 marks out of 50 in Paper A and 33/50 in Paper C and 22/50 in Paper B (Arithmetic). According to the applicant, she had failed in Paper B Arithmetic for want of only half of a mark out of 50. Applicant had obtained a copy of her answer book in the said paper. According to the applicant she had correctly answered question Nos. 1, 4, 5 and 7 correctly and question No. 2 partly correct and had thus obtained 22 marks out of 50. Insofar as tenth question is concerned, the applicant submits that she was initially awarded three marks but later on the said three marks were cancelled. It is the case of the applicant that the said question was answered correctly or partly corre...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
K. George Joseph, Administrative Member: 1. The Coconut Development Board by notification dated 20.04.2011 had invited applications for filling up one post of Statistical Assistant in the Pay Band of Rs. 9300-34800 with Grade Pay of Rs. 4200/-, by direct recruitment. The essential qualification for the said post is: (i) Degree in Statistics/ Mathematics/Economics with Statistics as once of the subjects from any recognized University, and (ii) About 2 years experience in the line. The applicant, aged 57 years, a Lower Division Clerk in the Coconut Development Board, was one among the short listed candidates who appeared in the written test, proficiency test on computer and interview on 30.12.2011. Considering overall performance of the candidates in the test and interview and their technical qualifications and experience, the Departmental Selection Committee recommended the name of the 4th respondent for appointment as Statistical Assistant which was approved by the Chairman, Coconut De...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
1. As the facts in these Original Applications are identical and the legal issue raised is the same, these O.As were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The applicants have filed this Original Applications seeking the following main relief. " 8.(ii) To direct the respondent to constitute Medical Baord consists of experts and to examine the applicant by the Medical Board to ascertain as to whether the applicant is suffering from any contagious decease, constitutional affliction or bodily infirmity unfitting him or likely to unfit him for public appointment/service." 3. As part of the recruitment formalities both the applicants had to undergo medical examination. The Senior Divisional Medical Officer has certified them as medically unfit in all categories. Therefore, the applicants submitted an appeal for a medical re-examination supported by a medical certificate of fitness from a medical practioner in a Government Hospital. Accordingly, the respondents con...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Mrs. K. Noorjehan, Administrative Member: 1. Seeking the following main reliefs, the applicants have filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. "8(a) Call for the records leading to the issue of Annexure A-12 series representations and pass final order and to direct the second respondent to make payment of remuneration at revised rate as per Annexures - A3 and A-4 to the applicants with retrospective effect within a time limit fixed by this Hon'ble Tribunal. (b) Direct respondents 2 to 3 to take necessary steps to regularise the service of the applicants with immediate effect. (c) Direct the respondents to disburse the arrears of wages of the applicants from the date of their joining with reasonable interest. (d) Direct the 1st respondent to give necessary direction to the 2nd respondent to dispose Annexure A-12 series representation positively in the matter of revised payment. (e) Award cost and incidental to this application" 2. The ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ernakulam
Ms. K. Noorjehan Administrative Member: 1. The applicant in this case is aggrieved by the refusal of the respondent Railways to remit the pro-rata pension liability for the service rendered by him in the railways to the Rubber Board. 2. Brief facts of the case as stated by the applicants are as follows: According to the applicant he joined the service of the respondent Railways as Junior Chemical and Metallurgical Assistant on 20.11.1973 and thereafter promoted to the next grade Rs.425-700 on 7.12.77. While working so he had, applied through proper channel for the post of Research Assistant in the Rubber Board where he was appointed in that capacity. On his selection in the Rubber Board he submitted his technical resignation to the 3rd respondent who in turn accepted the same vide Annexure A-1 w.e.f 17.11.1982. Accordingly, by Annx.A2, his service particulars were sent and a sum of Rs.6327/-, being the settlement of Provident Fund was transferred to the 5th respondent. He further averr...
Tag this Judgment!