Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2008)(2)SLJ299CAT
1. The three applicants aforesaid who belong to the IPS Cadre in the State of Bihar have come up for grant of Senior Time Scale of Pay with effect from the date they completed four years of service from the year of allotment or with effect from the date they have been posted as Superintendent of Police which admittedly, is a post specified in Schedule III to the Indian Police Service (Pay) Rules, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as "the Pay Rules"). The grievance is that they have been promoted to the Senior Time Scale not from either of those dates but from the dates they had cleared their departmental examinations.2. Since the question to be answered involved in all the three original applications is the same, these have been heard together and would be disposed of by this order.3. In this order the applicants aforesaid, in chronological order, will be referred to as App-I, App-2 and App-3 for sake (sic) of convenience.The arguments of either side are based on certain provision of law ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2008)(2)SLJ262CAT
1. A departmental proceeding commenced against the applicant vide memo of charges dated 19.9.2002 (Annexure-I) alleging therein that while the applicant was functioning as SB Postal Assistant at Jaintpur Estate during the given period, he had received certain amounts from different persons as deposits in the passbooks of the constituents, and the applicant entered the amount in the passbooks giving date-stamp, but after making entry of the deposit in the ledger, returned the pass book to the depositor. The allegation was that the applicant did not place the pass book, pay-in-slip and the ledger before the SPM, J Estate for checking in any of the four cases, with the result that the amount was not taken into SO account of the date, causing loss to the Department.2. The charges against the applicant having been found to be proved by the Enquiry Officer, the report was considered by the Disciplinary Authority, the Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Muzaffarpur Division who agreed wit...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2008)1STJ210NULL
1. The applicant, a member of the Indian Forest Service and presently posted as Regional Chief Conservator of Forest at Muzaffarpur, during the relevant period had faced a departmental proceeding having been served memorandum of charges dated 30.09.1993 (Annexure A/2) while he was posted as Project Dy. Director, Division-2, Bettiah under Champaran Forest Project (between 27.7.1989 to 05.05.1992). Briefly stated the charges included that the applicant, misusing his office, on 7.03.1991 had issued permit in favour of Allied Industries, Baghah for transportation of 200 cubic ft. of Saal logs though only 128.25 cubic ft. Saal logs were subsequently found. It was also charged that despite clear direction of the Project Director he had not seized the logs along with the truck carrying that, as also for creating false documents to help the aforesaid company in illegal transportation of the logs, also attempting to destroy the evidence in this regard. It was also charged that despite orders o...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2008)1STJ33NULL
1. The applicant is physically handicapped, being blind, belonging to general category and as such had been appointed to a Group 'C' post against 3% quota reserved for handicapped persons, in the Railways. He was firstly appointed as substitute waterman in Group 'D' but subsequently he was made regular by order dated 15.11.1980. The applicant, qualified for a Group 'C post, thereafter had represented for his appointment as such, reserved for the handicapped persons and by order dated 01.07.1985 (Annexure-A/2) he was appointed in the post of Announcer, temporarily. Since there was no regular post of Announcer in the required pay scale of Rs. 260-400, on his giving joining report on 01.12.1985 he was directed to work as Inquiry Clerk which was in higher pay scale (Rs. 330-560). Though another handicapped person, with blindness, one Brij Lal was appointed against the temporary post of clerk by order dated 04.07.1988, the applicant was denied that privilege, hence he represented again bef...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2008)(98)SLJ384CAT
1. Factual matrix necessary for a decision in this O.A. may be summarized as follows: The applicant joined Railway service and superannuated from service with effect from 31.3.1985. At the time he had joined the service, mandatory pension scheme was not implemented but thereafter the employees who were under Provident Fund (Contributory) Scheme, were given option to switch over to the pension scheme even before the pension was made mandatory. The simple dispute is that the applicant claims that he had filed his option for switching over to the pension scheme which option must be available in his service records, which the respondents have been denying in their Written statement and supplementary written statement. The respondents have claimed that the applicant had continued under contributory provident fund scheme and had never opted for pension. For that for the first time the applicant came up before this Tribunal in O.A. No. 242 of 1998 wherein the respondents had claimed that the...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2008)(2)SLJ74CAT
1. The applicant who was working under the respondents as Attendant-cum-Cook in Food and Nutrition Board at Ranehi has come up before this Tribunal for quashing Annexures-A/and A/13, the former being the order of the Disciplinary Authority (one R.N. Chakravorty, Dy. Technical Advisor) dated 31.07.1985, on consideration of the inquiry report in which the charge was found to be proved, punishing the applicant/proceedee with removal from service, and the latter being the order of the Appellate Authority recorded on re-consideration of the matter, in compliance of the direction of this Tribunal recorded in O.A. 616 of 1997, dated 07.10.2004, (i) Annexure-A/3 is order by the Disciplinary Authority (Shri R.N. Chakravorty) dated 26.11.1984 placing the applicant under suspension in contemplation of a departmental proceeding against him, with immediate effect. (ii) Annexure-A/4, dated 05.12.1984 is a memorandum of charges against the applicant under signature of the same Disciplinary Authority...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2007)(3)SLJ39CAT
1. The applicant who was employed as the Vice-Principal of Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangatan (K.V.S. in short). Upper Shillong underwent a preliminary inquiry ordered by the Competent Officer on the allegation of molesting a girl student, whereafter he was terminated from service.He has come for quashing of Annexure-A/4, order dated 10.11.2003 by which his services were terminated on allegation of moral turpitude, as well for quashing of Annexure-A/7 by which his appeal was also dismissed. Further praying to direct the respondents to reinstate him with all consequential benefits. As per the applicant, the respondents may be directed for conducting a regular inquiry against the applicant giving him reasonable opportunity to defend.2. Before proceeding further, Article 81(b) of the Education Code (in short, the Code) of K.V.S. may be reproduced which admittedly is applicable to the applicant: 81(b) Termination of services of an employee found guilty of immoral behaviour towards students. Wher...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2007)IISLJ341CAT
1. The main point for determination in the O. As. noted above being the same, with slight variations in the matter of reliefs sought as would be mentioned later in the order, all these cases have been heard together and will be disposed of by this common order.2. The separate applications in the cases having more than one applicant, to be allowed to prosecute the case jointly, also stand allowed.3. The main relief sought is to order the respondents to regularize, or to absorb them in regular posts either in Group 'D' or Group 'C'. In some cases prayer has also been made to direct the respondents to take work from the applicants as casual labourer, till their regularization/absorption.4. In O.A. 597 of 2005 there is also prayer, besides regularization in a Group 'D' post, that the pension and retiral benefits be not curtailed by the respondents who had acquired temporary status since long and to continue to obtain deduction from the GPF treating them at par with Group 'D' employees. Ho...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2007)(1)SLJ7CAT
1. This O.A. has been filed by the applicants against the order of the respondents dated 16.2.2005 (Annexurc-13) whereby they were reverted back to the post of PGT.2. The brief facts of the case is that the applicants had been duly appointed as Principal on the recommendation of the Selection Committee and the Competent Authority had approved the appointment of the applicants as Principal. The applicants were initially appointed in the Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (in short KVS) as Post Graduate Teachers.As per the recruitment notice which was published in the Employment News by the KVS by which applications were invited for various posts including the post of Principal. Apart from mentioning essential qualification, the employment notice also stated that the KVS may hold a written test and thereafter call the candidates for interview on the basis of merit test for academic, professional and other qualification.It was also stated that the selected candidates are liable to be posted an...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Patna
Reported in : (2006)(3)SLJ82CAT
1. The appliant who was working as Assistant (G), C.F.R.I. under C.S.R.I. was, as claimed, involved in a private complaint alleging some theft and was taken into custody by Police on 10.2.1995. It is not disputed that he was released on bail on 17.5.1995 under orders of a Court. The matter thereafter having come to the notice of the authorities, an order was issued dated 27.3.1995 at Annxure-A/1 under Sub-rule (2) of Rule 10 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as "the 1965 Rules"), was ordered to be deemed to have been suspended with effect from 10.2.1995, further directing that he would remain under suspension until further orders.2. While so remaining under suspension even after his release on bail, the applicant superannuated from service with effect from 31.1.1998, while he was being paid only suspension allowance as per rules. After retirement, he was paid provisional pension vide order dated 8.7.1998.The applica...
Tag this Judgment!