Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ407CAT
1. The applicant is aggrieved that the respondents are not granting four additional incentive increments to him on passing the ICWAI final examination and not stepping up of his pay on par with similarly situated Shri K. Jawahar, his junior. He is thus challenging the order of the respondents dated 27.11.2000 whereby his representation was rejected.2. The applicant joined the erstwhile Posts and Telegraph Department as postal clerk in 1968 and after various promotions, he came as Senior Accounts Officer in 1997 to MTNL, Mumbai and is working since 13.8.1997 as such. In between the applicant had also been promoted on temporary and ad hoc basis for 180 days in June, 1995 as Assistant Chief Accounts Officer and Chief Accounts Officer intermittently on various spells.3. While so working, he had passed the intermediate examination of ICWAI held in June, 1990. As per the O.M. dated 3.8.1999 of the Department of Telecom, he was granted two advance increments. According to the aforesaid O.M. ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ388CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for directions/orders to the respondents to pay monthly pension along with arrears and interest at the rate of 18% on the accumulated pension till the date of full payment, to pay the DCRG amount with interest at the rate of 18% p.a. and to issue the yearly complementary free passes as per eligibility of the applicant with immediate effect.2. The applicant Mathura Sarju who was working as Shunter/Driver in Bandra Marshalling Yard of Western Railway, Mumbai which is under the Administrative control of the Divisional Railway Manager, Mumbai Central Division, Mumbai No. 8 belongs to the Mechanical Department and controlled by the Mechanical Officers in the Divisional office. The applicant, Mathura Sarju during his service period was allotted Railway Quarter No. 122/A Type-II at Santacruz (East) Mumbai and he was residing there with his family. He sought voluntary retirement after completion of 30 years o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ280CAT
1. The applicant by the present application is seeking for a direction to Respondents 1 to 3 to give effect to his promotion to the post of Assistant Superintendent of Archeologist (ASA for short) with effect from 1.3.1985 i.e., the date on which respondents junior to him were promoted. He also wants a declaration that the decision of Respondent No. 2 to give effect to his promotion with effect from 1.9.86 is not just and proper particularly as on 1.3.1985. He was the senior most eligible person to be promoted as ASA. He has therefore prayed for quashing the promotion Respondents 4 to 13 and to place him above them in the order of seniority list.2. The applicant was working as Senior Technical Assistant since July, 1977. He was offered ad hoc promotion to the post of ASA vide order dated 22.1.1981. He refused the same on account of some domestic problem as he could not move out of Nagpur. He was again offered promotion on regular basis vide letter dated 24.8.1981 to the same post. He ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ258CAT
1. Applicant is challenging the order of the Director of Mines Safety, Dhanbad dated 3rd March, 2000 offering the post of Chowkidar to Respondent No. 5 by ignoring the legitimate claim of the applicant and not regularising him.2. The applicant was sponsored by the Employment Exchange, Nagpur for employment as casual labour as Mali. The applicant appeared for the interview and was found suitable and selected vide letter dated 20.11.1987. He was thereafter appointed as casual labour on daily wages at the rate of Rs. 21.90 P. per day as per order dated 29.1.1988.Accordingly, the applicant joined service on 29.1.1988.3. On 21.2.1989, the Respondent No. 2 issued O.M. wherein guidelines were issued for engagement of casual labour and persons on daily wages.This memo indicated the number of casual workers in different zones on different work. A note was given below the O.M. indicating certain posts, that the work of gardner, Western Zone, Nagpur Pump Operator at Parasiai and Safaiwalas at Be...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ494CAT
1. The applicant has approached this Tribunal for finalisation of his pension case.2. The applicant was appointed in 1977, declared as quasi permanent in 1980 came to be transferred from Ratnagiri to Nagpur and continued in service till 2.6.1987, while working at Nagpur, according to the applicant, he suffered from severe illness and due to ill-health and other circumstances beyond his control, he tendered his resignation on 02.6.1987. It was accepted on 11.11.1987 and a certificate was issued accordingly on 01.9.1999. The applicant had been working as Transmission Executive at All India Radio from 31.3.1977 to 1.6.1987.He also obtained no objection certificate. According to the applicant, since he had put in 10 years of continuous service, he is entitled to pensionary benefits, but the same has not been finalised in his case.As per Pension Rules, having put in more than 10 years of service, he is entitled to pension. The applicant has cited the judgment in the case of Omprakash Singh...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(3)SLJ76CAT
1. The issues and facts in all these 3 O.As. are identical and the Advocates for both the applicants and respondents are also same, so by mutual consent we have heard them together and have proceeded to pass a common order.2. The applicants have approached this Tribunal against the orders dated 27.12.2000 and 8.11.2001 of the Controller of Defence Accounts (Officers) Pune i. e. Respondent No. 3, whereby claim of the applicants for extending the benefit of pay scale of Rs. 1350-2200 with effect from either from the date of their initial appointment or from 1.1.1986 whichever is later has been rejected. All the applicants No. 1 to 14 are working as Data Entry Operators, Grade 'B' (in shortDEO Gr. B) in the pay scale of Rs. 4500-7000. The applicants No. 15 to 26 are working as Data Entry Operators Grade. 'C' (in short DEO Gr. 'C') in the pay scale of Rs. 5000-8000 and applicant No. 27 is working as Sr. Auditor in the scale of Rs. 5000-8000 in the office of Controller of Defence Accounts ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ186CAT
1. The applicant in this case, who is a Teacher with the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (K.V.S., in short) was working at Baroda and had made a request in terms of the policy of request transfers, of the KVS, for a transfer to the places of her choice. The places of choice were indicated by her in the application, a copy of which is annexed at page 25 (Annexure R-1). The choices are given in terms of Station Codes, which were explained to us in Open Court, admittedly as follows: Bangalore, Mumbai, Pune, Chandigarh and Delhi in that order. The applicant received a transfer order dated 1.4.2002, posting her to Kendriya Vidyalaya Colaba No. 2 Mumbai. It is alleged by the applicant that, although she took charge on 9.4.2002, and even took classes she was not allowed to perform her duties with effect from the next day i.e. 10.4.2002. Fearing that she would be transferred, she approached the Tribunal by filing the present O.A. on 16.4.2002. The applicant thereafter received a modified order o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(3)SLJ61CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the reliefs as under:- "(1) Quash and set aside the impugned order dated 23.2.2000 of the Respondent No. 2 being illegal and unconstitutional. (2) Hold and declare that the limitation incorporated in the definition of family suffers from vice of arbitrariness and discrimination and the words "before retirement" in Clause (ii) of the definition "Family" under Rule 54 (14)(b) to be ultra vires Article 14 of the Constitution and the same should be struck down. (3) Further hold and declare that the applicant is deemed to be the adopted son of late Shri Shridhar Chimurkar as held by the Supreme Court of India in Vijayalakshmamma's case as discussed above. (4) Direct the respondents to pay the arrears of pension from April, 1998 with interest till date; and (5) Any other relief as may be deemed expedient and necessary in the interest of justice." 2. The applicant was the son of Shri Prakash Narayanr...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ171CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to quash and set aside the Memorandum dated 10.01.1996 (Exhibit 'B') with the direction to the Respondents to treat the Applicant as belonging to the Examiner's cadre and he be extended all benefits on that basis including promotion to the cadre of Appraiser and if need be, to cancel and withdraw the unilateral order passed by them regularising the services of the Applicant as Preventive Officer, promote the Applicant as Appraiser from the date any of his junior has been promoted to the said cadre under Estt. Office Order No.85/95 dated 03.04.1995 with seniority, fixation of pay and arrears on that basis. In alternative, the Applicant has sought the seniority in the cadre of Preventive Officer w.e.f. 08.03.1983 and grant him promotion to the post of Superintendent of Customs on that basis with all consequential benefits.2. The Applicant was appointed as a Stenographer in the Customs Department. He was...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai
Reported in : (2003)(3)SLJ270CAT
1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for issue a mandatory order directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group-'A' in the light of the direction/guidelines issued by the Government of India, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension vide Memorandum dated 14,9.1992 by holding a review Departmental Promotion Committee held two years after January 1990 and based on the said review to order the promotion of the applicant as Assistant Commissioner of Customs, Group-'A' retrospectively from 1992 on which the applicant became eligible for promotion as per guidelines contained in the said Memorandum dated 14.9.1992.2. On perusal of para 1 of the O.A., we find that applicant has challenged Office Order No. 16/90, 225/92, 21/93, 185/94, 225/94 and 34/96 dated 17.1.1990, 3.9.1992, 28.1.1993, 20.9.1994, 19.10.1995 and 20.2.1996 respectively by which Ap...
Tag this Judgment!