Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
SHRI HRIDAY NARAIN, MEMBER (ADMN.) The present OA has been filed against the alleged inaction on the part of the respondents in not considering the applicants for transfer to the place of their choice while considering the other Telecom Mechanics for transfer to the place of their choice. 2. The applicants were initially appointed as Regular Mazdoors and on passing the requisite test and after undergoing the requisite training, they were promoted/appointed as Telecom Mechanics during the years 1994-96 and were posted in different units under the control of GMTD, BSNL, Guntur. 3. The 3rd respondent issued guidelines for deployment/request transfer of non executive staff in Lr.No.TA/STB/DOS/Circular2, dated 26.5.2005 laying down certain guidelines relating to transfers for deployment of staff to needy/unmanned exchanges/stations, according to which, for deployment, junior most officials in the stations would be transferred as per the existing rules and the tenure will be two years and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Heard the learned counsel for the respondents. None appeared for the applicant. However, Ms. Anuradha, learned counsel representing the counsel for the applicant was heard on 6.7.2009 when the matter was adjourned to enable her to produce the relevant C.A.T. Orders on which she was relying. 2. The present OA has been filed by the applicant against the order of recovery passed in Orders dated 28.5.2008 by the 1st respondent as confirmed by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings dated 30.7.2008 with the following prayer:- “It is humbly prayed that this Hon'ble Tribunal be pleased to declare proceedings in Memo No.F4-2/06-07 dated 28.5.2008 issued by the 1st respondent and as confirmed by the 2nd respondent vide proceedings in Memo N.ST/21-3/118/ChRNG/NZB/08 dated 30.7.2008 as illegal, arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of Constitution of India and to set aside the same and pass such other order or orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the cas...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
ORAL ORDER : (As per Hon'ble Mr.Justice.P.Lakshmana Reddy, Vice Chairman) Heard the learned Counsel Mr.Abhinand Kumar Shavili for the Applicant and the learned Sr. Standing Counsel Mr.G.Jayaprakash Babu, who took notice on behalf of the Respondents. 2. This application is filed challenging the transfer of the applicant on promotion from Survey of India, Hyderabad to All India Institute of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation at Mumbai, in the cadre of Chief Medical Officer, Senior Administrative Grade. 3. The learned Counsel for the Applicant submitted that the applicant has completed 58 years and as per the draft transfer policy dated June/2006, those who are going to retire within two years shall not ordinarily be transferred unless there is a request for their transfer to a particular station. He further submitted that out of 78 people, more than 70 have been accommodated at their respective places even on promotion and that there are vacancies at Hyderabad and that some, who are po...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
ORAL ORDER (As per Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Lakshmana Reddy, Vice-Chairman) Heard Mr. K.R.K.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the applicants and Mr. V. Rajeswara Rao, learned standing counsel for the respondents. 2. The grievance of the applicants in this application is that though as per Para 303(a) of IREM Vol. I, 1985 seniority of Assistant Loco Pilots is to be fixed on the basis of the marks obtained in the final examination conducted after the completion of the training, the respondents without conducting final examination after completion of the training and in fact dispensing with one of the training components viz., diesel training, fixed the seniority on the basis of the examination conducted in respect of the individual components of training without notifying the merit order. Learned counsel for the applicants contended that in a similar case wherein one of the components has been dispensed with and when no final examination has been conducted, the South Central Railway sought ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
ORAL ORDER (As per Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Lakshmana Reddy, Vice-Chairman) Heard Mr. V. Ravindranath Reddy, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. M.C. Jacob, learned standing counsel for the respondents. 2. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicant has been duly selected and allotted to Vijayawada Division and the Vijayawada Division people gave offer of appointment to the applicant on 25.06.2009 (subsequent to the filing of this O.A.) and that the applicant has to report before the authorities and undergo required medical examination and that the applicant has not been denied appointment. He further submitted that in so far as the seniority is concerned, his seniority will be given on the basis of the marks obtained in the examination conducted by the Railway Recruitment Board. 3. In view of the said submissions of the learned counsel for the respondents, we are of the considered view that no further orders need be passed in this O.A. as the very relief pr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
ORAL ORDER : (As per Hon'ble Mr.Justice.P.Lakshmana Reddy, Vice Chairman) Heard Mr.K.Sudhakar Reddy, the learned Counsel for the Applicant and Mr.G.Jayaprakash Babu , the learned Sr. Central Govt. Standing Counsel on behalf of the Respondents. 2. This application is filed challenging the impugned transfer order dated 20.6.2009 and the rejection order dated 6.7.2009, wherein the representation of the applicant dated 22.6.2009 was rejected. The representation was made requesting cancellation of her transfer order dated 20.6.2009 and for retention. 3. The relevant facts in brief are as follows: The applicant belongs to IRS 1989 batch and while she was working as Additional Commissioner of Income Tax at Eluru, she has been transferred to Visakhapatnam in the same capacity. Aggrieved by that transfer, she filed O.A.No.550/2009 before this Tribunal. In the said OA, it was contended that she made a representation on 22.6.2009 and her representation is not yet disposed of. In view of the same,...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
P. Lakshmana Reddy, VC) This application is filed by a widow of late Shri R. Srinivas, who died while serving the Railways, seeking appointment on compassionate grounds. 2. The relevant facts as stated in the application are as follows: Late Shri R. Srinivas, the husband of the applicant, was initially engaged as a Commission Vendor in the catering unit of the South Central Railway at Secunderabad with effect from 4.12.1991. After rendering service as Commission Vendor for about 13 years, his case has been approved by the competent authority for screening and absorption against Group-D post along with others vide letter dated 20.5.2004. In that letter, the applicant was informed that the screening test will be held on 31.5.2004. Accordingly, late Shri R. Srinivas appeared for the said test and was declared suitable for absorption as Trackman in the pay scale of Rs.2610-3540 vide letter dated 20.7.2004. In the said letter, it was mentioned that if the terms and conditions mentioned ther...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
P. Lakshmana Reddy, VC) This application is filed seeking the following reliefs: “(a) to declare that the memorandum in F.No. CCAP/9(9)/Estt. 2003 dated 22.9.2003 of the 1st respondent is highly illegal, arbitrary and contrary to rules and set aside the same; (b) To consequently direct the 1st respondent to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the grade of Inspect of Income Tax by conducting a review DPC of the DPC held in January, 2003 and if found fit, to promote the applicant as Inspector of Income Tax w.e.f. January 2003 with all consequential benefits; (c)To consequently fix his seniority in the cadre of Income Tax Inspector immediately below Ms. T. Chamundeswari; and (d)To pass such other order or orders as are deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” 2.The relevant facts as set out in the application in brief are as follows: The applicant joined service in the Income Tax Department in A.P. as a Lower Division Clerk (LDC) under a reserve...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
ORAL ORDER (As per Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. Lakshmana Reddy, Vice-Chairman) Heard P. Sidheer Rao, Ld. Counsel for Mr. G. Vidyasagar, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr.G. Jaya Prakash Babu, learned Sr. CGSC for the official respondents who took notice on their behalf and Mr. K. Sudhakar Reddy, learned counsel for the respondent No.3 2. This application is filed seeking cancellation of the transfer order dated 16.06.2009 in so far as it relates to the applicant herein and the unofficial respondent. 3. Relevant facts in brief are as follows: The applicant is working as Medical Officer in the Cine Workers' Welfare Fund Dispensary at Hyderabad since 1996. Her husband is working as Inspector of Police at Hyderabad. While so, on 16.06.2009, the 2nd respondent passed the impugned order transferring the applicant to Warangal dispensary and posting the Medical Officer at Warangal Dispensary viz., 3rd respondent herein, in her place in Hyderabad dispensary and two more officers were also...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Hyderabad
Mrs. Bharati Ray, Member (J) This application has been filed by the applicant seeking for the following relief : To call for the records pertaining to the Panel No. 274 DT. 4-01.2008, and consequently set aside the letter No. P/Gaz/148/W.P./26008/05/ KS dated 9-04-2008 after declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal and unjust and consequently direct the respondents to empanel the applicant for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer in pursuance of the above said selection. 2. It is the case of the applicant that he was initially appointed as Tracer in Guntakal division and was promoted to the post of Sr. Draftsman, Design Assistant and Section Engineer (Designs). He was further promoted to the post of Sr. Section Engineer (Construction) in the office of the Chief Administrative Officer, South Central Railway, Secunderabad on 18th June, 2003. In order to fill up 24 vacancies (07 SC; 04ST; 13UR) of Assistant Engineers in Civil Engineering Department in scale Rs. 7500-250-12000 agai...
Tag this Judgment!