Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present CCP is preferred by the applicant for non-compliance of order dated 19th December, 2011 passed in O.A.No. 443/2010 wherein the Tribunal directed the respondents to convene a review DPC to consider the case of the applicant for granting 3rd financial up-gradation without taking into consideration the un-communicated downgraded or adverse remarks for the relevant years. 2. Sri Deepak Shukla brief holder for Sri Avneesh Pal for respondents files compliance report and as per para 3 of the said compliance report, it is indicated that the order of the Tribunal has been fully complied with. Learned counsel for applicant has no objection to this fact and submits that the order of the Tribunal has been fully complied with and nothing survive to be adjudicated in the present CCP. 3. Accordingly, CCP is dismissed and notices issued to the respondents stand discharged....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J) 1. The present O.A. is preferred by the applicant under section 19 of the AT Act with the following releifs:- (i).A specific direction may be issued to the respondents in the interest of justice to regularize the allotment of Railway Quarter No. Type II, 59-C, Sleeper Ground, Railway Colony, Alambagh, Lucknow in favour of the applicant NO.2 Harsh Kumar Handa, which was duly allotted to his father- applicant No.1, who retired as Railway employees. (ii). A specific direction may be issued to the respondents in the interest of justice to release the gratuity amount and other retiral dues of applicant No.1 forthwith with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of his retirement which is withheld only due to non-vacation of the railway quarter in question. (iii). To grant any other relief deemed fit and proper in the circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice awarding cost of the application to the applicants. 2. The brief facts of the case are that th...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present Original Applicant is filed under Section 19 of the AT Act with the following reliefs:- (a). That this Honble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 3.2.2010 as contained in Annexure No. A-1 and direct opposite parties to appoint applicant on one of the post in the department according to his qualification and ability under dying in harness rules. (b). Any other relief deemed just and proper in the circumstances of the case with cost of O.A. in favour of the applicant. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant is the son of the ex-employee who died while in service. It is indicated by the learned counsel for the applicant that applicant while working in the respondents organization died on 24.3.2000. Subsequently in 2001, the applicant applied for grant of compassionate appointment. The case of the applicant was rejected in 2005. Thereafter, the applicant preferred O.A. No. 587/2005. Subsequently, the case of the ap...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present Original Applicant is filed under Section 19 of the AT Act with the following reliefs:- i). To quash the order dated 27.4.2012 to the extent it reduced the claim of the applicant from Rs. 242716/- to Rs. 126753/- contained as Annexure No.1 to this O.A. ii). To pay whole of the claim of medical reimbursement as claimed by the applicant after adjusting the amount already paid to the applicant along with interest @ 18% pa. iii). Any other relief which this Honble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be passed. iv).cost of the present case. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant retired from the post of Draftsman Grade I after attaining the age of superannuation. The applicant was a CGHS beneficiaries and for cardiac treatment, the applicant was hospitalized in Divine Heart and Multispecialty Hospital, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow which is the enlisted authorized hospital with the CGHS. After the trea...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present O.A. is preferred by the applicant under section 19 of the AT Act with the following releifs:- i). Issue an order or direction in the appropriate nature directing the opposite parties to make the payment of the amount of retirement gratuity and the amount of commutation of 40% amount of pension to the applicant with effect from due date along with interest @ 18% per annum from due date till the date of actual payment in accordance with law. ii). Issue any other or further order or direction which this Honble Tribunal may deem proper in the facts and circumstances of the case in favour of the applicant. iii). Allow the present O.A. with costs. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed on the post of Mechanist in 1975 and thereafter, he was promoted to the post of Skilled Mechanist Grade II, and thereafter Skilled Mechanist Grade I, and lastly on the post of Junior Engineer in the Northern Railway. The applican...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present O.A. is preferred by the applicant under section 19 of the AT Act with the following releifs:- i). To quash the impugned order dated 9.6.2011 contained as Annexure No.A-1 with all consequential benefits. ii). To restrain the respondents from imposing recovery in terms of order dated 9.6.2011. iii). To restrain the respondents from reducing the pay of the applicant in terms of order dated 9.6.2011. iv).Any other relief, which this Honble Tribunal may deem fit, just and proper under the circumstances of the case may also be passed. v). Cost of the present case may also be awarded as the applicant has unnecessarily been dragged into litigation. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant who was working in the respondents organization was promoted on the post of Assistant Electrical Foreman on adhoc basis. Thereafter, vide order dated 10.6.1999, the applicant was promoted on the post of JE-I in the grade of Rs. 5500-9000 and subsequently...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present Original Application is preferred by the applicant u/s 19 of the AT Act, with the following reliefs:- Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that this Honble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to quash the order dated 29.8.2007 contained in Annexure No.1 and a direction be issued to promote the applicant as Staff Car Driver Grade II with effect from 29.12.96 and Staff Car Driver Grade I with effect from 29.12.2002 with all consequential benefits. It is so prayed in the interest of justice. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as Ordinary Grade Driver on 29.12.1987 and since then he was working on that post and was given promotion as Staff Car Driver Grade II by means of an order dated 17.7.2007 w.e.f. 1.4.207. The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that the applicant was entitled to get promotion of Staff Car Driver Grade II w.e.f. 2912.1996 and further Driver Grade I w.e.f. 29.12.2002 as per the provisi...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present Original Applicant is filed under Section 19 of the AT Act with the following reliefs:- a). to issue /pass an order or direction setting aside the impugned order dated 2.5.1991 (as contained in Annexure No.A-1) vide which the respondent No.3 reduced/ refixed the pay of the petitioner at the stage of Rs. 1350/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986 and ordered for making recovery and impugned order dated 9.8.2005 passed by respondent No. 2 (allegedly ) through the respondent No.3 rejecting the representation dated 31.3.2005 made for fixation of pay as directed by this Honble Tribunal vide judgment and order dated 5.1.2005 after summoning the original records. b). to issue/pass an order or direction, directing the respondents to refix the pay of the applicant at the stage of Rs. 1720/- w.e.f. 1.1.1986 in pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300 and refund the recovered amount of Rs. 80,611/- as recovered from the pensionary benefits of the applicant and pay the arrears of salary w....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present Original Application is preferred by the applicant u/s 19 of the AT Act, with the following reliefs:- i). The Honble Tribunal be pleased to quash the order dated 30.4.2008 and 31.4.7/8.2008 which are contained as Annexure No. 1 and 2 to the Original Application. ii). The Honble Tribunal be pleased to direct the opposite parties to reinstate the applicant in service and to give all consequential benefits including seniority and salary. iii). The Honble Tribunal be pleased to quash the order dated 12/25/2/2009 which is contained as Annexure No. 7 to the Original Application. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed as Khalasi in 1982. He was served with a charge sheet in 2007 under Rule 9 of the Railway Servants (DandA) Rules, 1968. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that the applicant has misused the Railway Pass which was taken by him in the name of Smt. Shanti Devi and four children whereas the applicants w...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Lucknow
Navneet Kumar, Member (J). 1. The present O.A. is preferred by the applicant under section 19 of the AT Act with the following releifs:- a). to quash the impugned punishment order dated 21.11.2005 communicated by the respondent No.1 as contained in Annexure No.A-1 to the O.A. b). to direct the respondents to pay the cost of this application. c). any other order which this Honble Tribunal deems just and proper in the circumstances of the case be also passed. 2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant while working as Postal Assistant in Lakhimpur Kheri has applied for leave for 12.12.2002 to the Post Master Kheri to leave station and had gone to Hardoi in connection with the problems of certain employees at Hardoi. The learned counsel for the applicant pointed out that he has a peaceful meeting with the officer. Subsequently, in 2004, the applicant was served with a major penalty charge sheet inter-alia charging him for an incident of 12.12.2002 that he misbehaved with the Su...
Tag this Judgment!