Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. The instant application is directed against an order communicated under memo No. ADMN/SE/DEPTN/IRCON/248, dated 28th January, 1992, whereby the acceptance of the applicants' resignation under office order No. II/91/ 228, dated 1st January, 1991. w.e.f. 15th July, 1991 (A/N), has been cancelled on the plea of public interest. There was a prayer for direction upon the South Eastern Railway authorities to immediately release the superannuation benefits to which the applicant was entitled to together with 18% interest p.a.2. The basic facts of the case are uncontroverted. The applicant having joined the Railway Service as Store Issuer got promoted to the post of Section Officer in Garden Reach, South Eastern Railway. Subsequently, pursuant to the invitation of applications for appointment to Indian Railway Construction Company Limited (for short, IRCON), the applicant, being found eligible for appointment on deputation, was released by the parent department i.e., Railways and he thereu...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. While the applicant was working as Deputy Registrar on ad-hoc basis in the Calcutta Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT in short), he was served with a letter dated 17.4.2000 issued from the Office of the respondent No. 2 i.e., Registrar, Principal Bench, New Delhi, by which he was informed that in view of recasting of seniority of Section Officers/Court Officers/Private Secretaries as on 1.11.1989 as per revised seniority list circulated under letter dated 4.4.2000, his seniority position was relegated to a lower slot and accordingly he was required to be reverted to his original cadre of Section Officer and hence, the applicant was asked to exercise his option in writing to select a place of posting in any of the four identified Benches where vacancies were available. The option was directed to be exercised within 19th April, 2000. Fearing his reversion with simultaneous transfer to far away place, the applicant has filed this original application challenging the sa...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. Seven applicants have jointly filed this OA challenging the decision of the respondents dated 10-10-95 (Annexure-A3) by which the panel dated 14-7-95 for promotion to the post of OS Grade II was cancelled.2. The admitted facts in this case are that the applicants and private respondents were working as Head Clerk in the Security Department of Eastern Railways. In order to fill up 13 vacancies in the posts of O.S.Grade. II from amongst Head Clerks a notice was issued on 28-12-94. The 36 eligible candidates were selected for appearing in the written test which was held on 24-6-95 and a further continuation test or supplementary test was held on 7-7-95. 28 candidates appeared in the aforesaid written test and out of them 20 candidates qualified for viva voce test. The viva voce test was held on 13-7-95 and on 14-7-95, a panel of 12 candidates as per Annexure A-1 was published. The names of the applicants have been included in this panel. But the names of the private respondents did no...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. This matter was originally filed before the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court as a writ petition in the year 1982 challenging the charge-sheets dated 10.11.70 and 23.2.71, two enquiry reports, two punishment show cause notices dated 27.1.73, the penalty order dated 11.5.73 as also the appellate orders dt. 17.6.80 and 4.2.81. A rule was issued on 10.5.82 by the High Court. Subsequently, by operation of Section 29 of the A.T. Act, this writ petition stood transferred to this Tribunal for disposal in the year 1995 and renumbered as T.A. 20 of 1995.2. At the material time, the applicant was working as Laboratory Assistant in Desbhbandu Vidyalaya (Boys') under the Chittaranjan Locomotive Works (CLW). The case of the applicant is that on being appointed as Laboratory Asst., he was posted in the Biological Laboratory of the aforesaid school on and from 22.3.65. According to the applicant, he had no knoweldge about biology and his services were being utilised for clerical job of the school thoug...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. Shri Billeswar Saha working as Superintendent E/M Gr. I Engineering Stores Depot Office of the Chief Engineer, Calcutta Zone, Calcutta has filed this O.A. against his non-promotion as Supdt. EM/Gr. I from the date of his juniors promotion and loss of seniority in the grade and prayed for the following reliefs: "8 (a) Declaration that the applicant is entitled to be promoted as Superintendent E/M Gr. I w.e.f. 25.08.1981 from when his junior Sri Nirmal Chand (MES 3111350) was so promoted and to the inclusion of his name in the All India Seniority list of Superintendent E/M Gr. I on the basis of such date of promotion and that the office order and seniority lists contrary to applicant's such date of promotion and seniority are arbitrary, unlawful and liable to be quashed; (b) Declaration that the respondents are bound by the Tribunal's Division bench judgment dated 02.07.1991 (annexure/A-12) holding that the disciplinary proceeding against the applicant is to be treated as abandoned o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. The question before us for decision in this case is whether the allegations made in the charge-sheet dated 16.11.99 (Annexure-A3) issued against the applicant and the statements of imputations of misconduct as mentioned in articles of charges 1 and 2 of the charge-memo, if remain unrebutted from the side of the delinquent official, would warrant a departmental proceeding on the charge of culpable negligence in the conduct of the applicant being violative of the provisions Rule 3(1)(i), (ii) and (iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 or not.2. According to the applicant, while he was functioning as Joint Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, Calcutta, he suddenly to his prejudice, received the impugned charge-memo dated 16.11.99 along with the articles of charge and imputations of misconduct for holding a departmental enquiry under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 for imposition of major penalty. On receipt of the said charge-memo, the applicant gave a reply denying the allegation...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. Shri D.R. Jagiya, Technical Asstt. Song & Drama in Min. of Information and Broadcasting has filed this O.A. against issue of chargesheet and disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 and prayed for quashing the same.2. The fact of the case in brief is that the chargesheet dated 26.3.1998 (Annexure-A/5) under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 was issued against the applicant by Dy. Director (Admn.) the respondent No.3. To enquire into the charges Inquiry Officer was appointed vide order dated 15.6.98 (Annexure-A/3) by the Director, the respondent No. 2. By another order dated 15.6.98 (Annexure-A/4) the respondent No. 2 appointed Presenting Officer. The Enquiry Officer vide notice dated 11.9.98 (Annexure-A/2) fixed the first date of hearing on 9.10.98. The applicant represented against the appointment of Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer by respondent No. 2 vide his representation dated 22.9.98 (Annexure-A/1). The applicant challenged the authority o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. The dispute involved in this case is regarding seniority between the applicant and the private respondents No. 7 and 8 in the cadre of Forest Ranger, A&N Administration, which is a vital property of the Government servant for advancement of the careers in service. The case of the applicant is that in pursuance of the advertisement of a course published in Daily Telegrams dated 24.8.1985, Annexure 'A' to the application, for selection of the local candidates for undergoing training for one year Forest Rangers Training course commencing from 1.1.1986 in Southern Forest Ranger's College, Coimbatore (Tamil Nadu) the applicant applied for the same and he was selected for such training. Thereafter he is B.Sc and he was sent for training for one year with effect from 1.1.1986 after executing a bond to serve the A&N Administration for a period of five years. Accordingly, the applicant successfully completed the training of one year and thereafter on successful completion of the tra...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. By this application 23 applicants who were appointed on different capacities in the office of the District Rehabilitation Centre (DRC in short), Midnapore as per letter dated 9.6,84, Annexure 'A/2' to the application, claim direction upon the respondents to treat them to be Central Government employees for all purposes of service security, service benefit, pay and allowances etc. It is stated by the applicants that they are employees of the District Rehabilitation Centre hereinafter referred to as DRC scheme, Kharagpur now transferred at Midnapore. In 1983 a Pilot Project indicating the detailed objectives and project cost was established in block areas of Kharagpur and accordingly a scheme was framed by the Government of India for regulating the said function and activities and indicating the detailed objectives and project cost with a stipulation that the project would be funded entirely by the Government of India, Ministry of Social Welfare and it is also stipulated in the said ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Kolkata
1. The question before us is whether the applicant who has been allowed to reside in one room of the Hostel in the public interest is entitled to get house rent allowance in accordance with the House Rent Allowance Rules applicable to the Central Government. According to the applicant, she was appointed in the capacity of Lady Superintendent in the scale of Rs. 1350-2200/(PR) in the office of the Director, All India Institute of Hygiene and Public Health, Calcutta under the control of Government of India in the Ministry of Health and Family Welfare (Department of Health) Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi, the applicant was provided with residential accommodation from the Central Government General Pool accommodation at the initial stage of her appointment as she was junior to be considered for allotment of the Govt.accommodation immediately after joining the post. Accordingly, she was staying for the time being in the Lady Hostel and she was provided with a room which is meant for the students...
Tag this Judgment!