Skip to content


Judgment Search Results Home > Cases Phrase: mediation Court: central administrative tribunal cat delhi Year: 2012 Page 1 of about 36 results (0.086 seconds)

Jan 04 2012 (TRI)

Gulshan Kumar Batra Vs. Lt. Governor Through Chief Secretary, Govt. of ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Jan-04-2012

george paracken: 1. the applicant has made this original application against the impugned memorandum no. f.7[04]/2004/dov/1195 dated 25.2.2010 proposing to hold an enquiry against him under rule 14 of ccs (cca) rules, 1965. the statement of charge against him was as under: sh. g.k.batra while functioning as tehsildar, najafgarh during the period september 1996 to january 1998 committed gross misconduct in as much as he effected mutation of land comprising in khasra no.36/19 (4-16), 20/1(1-0), 21/1(1-12), 21/2(2-4) 22 min (3-16) total measuring 13 bigha 08 biswa situated in village paprawat, tehsil najafgarh on the basis of a sale deed executed at bomay by somebody else other than the bhoomidhar owner and also submitted/signed by some one else other than the applicant for mutation on 17th october, 1996, with regard to the sale of land. shri g.k.batra passed the order of mutation in the back date in violation of the circular dated 3rd october 1996 issued by adm (revenue) which imposed restrictions on mutation of lands situated in delhi on the basis of sale deed executed/registered outside delhi by deliberately avoiding the said circular. sh. g.k.batra inspite of his knowledge of the restriction imposed vide circular dated 3rd october 1996, marked the application to the kanoongo putting the date under his signature as 17.9.96 whereas the application was dated as 17.10.96. sh. g.k.batra passed the mutation order on 2nd october 1996 when the office was closed for a national .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 03 2012 (TRI)

Prakash Chauhan Vs. Municipal Corporation of Delhi and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Feb-03-2012

dr. veena chhotray: 1. the applicant is an assistant assessor and collector under the mcd. through this oa he has challenged the penalty of reduction in pay in the present time scale by two stages for a period of two years. though the penalty had been ordered to be with cumulative effect as per the order of the disciplinary authority (da), subsequently the stipulation of its cumulative impact has been removed by way of modification by the order of the appellate authority (aa). the oa seeks by way of relief: (i) quashing the das order dated 9.6.2009 and the aas order dated 24.2.2011; (ii) a declaration regarding the charge memo dated 10.5.2006 being illegal and unjust; and (iii) a direction for restoring the reduced pay and release of arrears with interest. besides, allowing costs in favour of the applicant and passing any other order deemed fit under the circumstances have also been prayed. 2. the learned counsels shri m.k. bhardwaj and shri duli chand would appear respectively for the applicant and the respondents. 3. a major penalty disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the applicant vide the charge memo dated 10.5.2006. this pertained to the year 2005 during which the applicant had been functioning as assistant assessor and collector (aac) in the assessment and collection department, civil line zone of mcd. the charge was about mutation of a government property (details specified) in favour of a private party. the mutation letter had been issued under the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 05 2012 (TRI)

Attar Singh Vs. the Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Defe ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Principal Bench New Delhi

Decided on : Oct-05-2012

g. shanthappa, member (j): the above applications are filed by the applicants under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, challenging the legality and propriety of the decision taken by the 3rd respondent in considering the existing casual labourers with temporary status (clts) with modified educational qualification of matriculation only being eligibility criteria for their regularization against erstwhile group ??d is legally unsustainable as contended in clarification dated 20.09.2011 and 14.06.2012. further relief of direction to the respondents not to hold any selection of earmarked 2/3 vacancies from amongst the clts workers as advertised out of 35 till final decision from ministry of defence is assured to fill up in erstwhile group ??d post with the modified procedure to meet requirement under revised system as per 6th pay revision so far as clts workers are concerned. further relief of direction to respondents to obtain appropriate clarification in regard to existing clts for their regularization the manner and extent applicability of provisions contemplated as per dopandt om no.490/31/2008-estt(c) dated 28.01.2012 circulated under mod are applicable after imparting requisite training which is made applicable w.e.f. 1.1.2006 till then regularization be held in abeyance inter alia keeping vacancies reserved for the applicant in that category of existing clts. 2. the reliefs in both the oas are common. accordingly, we have clubbed the two cases and pass .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 24 2012 (TRI)

D.K. Sinha Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Ministry of Micro, Sm ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Jan-24-2012

v.k. bali, chairman: 1. d. k. sinha, the applicant herein, has filed this original application under section 19 of the administrative tribunals act, 1985, calling in question the presidential order according sanction for departmental proceedings against him under rule 9 of the central civil services (pension) rules, 1972 (hereinafter to be referred as the rules of 1972), as contained in order dated 21.11.2007 issued under signatures of the additional development commissioner and chief vigilance officer, office of the development commissioner (micro, small and medium enterprises), new delhi, along with its enclosures, i.e., the memorandum, annexure-i (statement of articles of charge); annexure-ii (statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour in support of the articles of charge); and annexure-iii (list of documents). 2. shorn of unnecessary verbiage, the facts that may be relevant for adjudication of the points raised in the present oa would reveal that the applicant while working as assistant director in the office of the development commissioner under the ministry of micro, small and medium enterprises (mmsme), applied for the post of deputy general manager in the rites ltd., a public sector undertaking of government of india, in pursuance of an advertisement dated 02-08.09.2006 in the employment news. his name was duly forwarded by mmsme, and clearance from the point of vigilance was also given, and it was stated that the appointment of the applicant in rites .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2012 (TRI)

Madan Pal Vs. Union of India Through Secretary Ministry of Urban Devel ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Feb-27-2012

oral: m.l. chauhan, j. 1. the applicant has filed this oa against the impugned order 25.3.2009 (annexure a-1) passed by the disciplinary authority, order dated 11.8.2009 passed by the appellate authority whereby the appeal of the applicant was rejected and order dated 30.3.2011 (annexure a-3) dismissing the review application, and has prayed that these impugned orders may be quashed and set aside. 2. briefly stated, facts of the case are that the major penalty proceeding was initiated against the applicant under rule 14 of ccs (cca) rules, 1964 (for short rules 1964) by issuing a charge sheet dated vide om dated 28.12.2007. allegations against the applicant were that he misbehaved with one smt. kumud gautam, ldc and created panic at working place and spoiled the official decorum and discipline. inquiry was held and the charges against the applicant were proved. ultimately the disciplinary authority vide impugned order dated 25.3.2009 (annexure a-1), for the reasons recorded therein, imposed the penalty of reduction by two stages for a period of two years with immediate effect, i.e., w.e.f. 1.4.2009 with cumulative with a stipulation that the applicant will not earn increment of pay during the period of reduction and that on the expiry of the period, the reduction will have no effect on postponing his future increment of pay. aggrieved by this, applicant preferred appeal as well as review application, which were also dismissed vide order dated 11.8.2009 (annexure a-2) and .....

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 06 2012 (TRI)

Ms. Arti Lal Vs. Union of India Secretary to the Government of India a ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Feb-06-2012

dr. ramesh chandra panda, member (a) 1. ms. arti lal, the applicant herein, having been successful in the civil service examination in the year 2009 (cse-2009) conducted by the union public service commission (upsc) in the scheduled caste (sc) category and secured 101st rank, has been selected to the indian administrative service (ias). her grievance is that though she has indicated uttar pradesh (up) as her home state, she has been allocated gujarat state cadre. thus, impugning the cadre allocation policy for the all india service dated 10.08.2008, she has prayed for a direction from the tribunal to the respondents to allocate her up cadre as insider sc officer. 2. in brief, the facts of the present oa are that the applicant applied for and wrote cse 2009 as sc candidate. she was successful and ranked 101st and was appointed in the 2010 batch of ias vide letter dated 18.08.2010 (page-36). shri yogesh kumar, the second respondent who also belongs to the sc category and has been selected to the ias from the same examination secured 183rd rank and has been allocated up cadre. in the cse-2009, 12 vacancies were available in the up cadre, out of which, four were for insiders (i) and 8 for outsiders (o). these vacancies were filled up from obc (two insiders and three outsiders), sc (one insider) and general (one insider and five outsider). the insider sc vacancy was filled up by the 2nd respondent but the applicant belonging to the sc category though higher in rank to the 2nd .....

Tag this Judgment!

May 16 2012 (TRI)

M.M. Bhatt and Others Vs. Delhi Jal Board, Govt. of Nct of Delhi, Varu ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : May-16-2012

dr. ramesh chandra panda, member (a): ma no. 1536/2011 1. respondents have moved this ma under rule 15(2) of the central administrative tribunal (procedure) rules, 1987 for restoration of the ma no.2352/2009 and ma no.2353/2009 as both the mas were dismissed on 13.05.2011 for default and non-prosecution. 2. we heard ms. kanika agnihotri, learned counsel for the applicant - delhi jal board (djb) and mr. vishwa lochan madan, learned counsel representing the respondents in the ma. 3. it is stated in the ma that the counsel was on her legs in another court in the tribunal and when the present case was called out she could not present herself. in the background of this unfortunate circumstances both mas were dismissed for default and non-prosecution. she, therefore, prayed that ma no. 1536/2011 should be allowed and the ma no. 2352/2009 and ma no.2353/2009 should be restored. 4. on the other hand, the counsel for the respondents in the ma no. 1536/2011 has opposed the recalling of the tribunals order dated 13.05.2011. it is contended that in order to protect the dignity and honour of the tribunal, the ma no. 2352/2009 and ma no. 2353/2009 should not be restored on the ground that though the tribunal allowed the ta no. 1063/2009 with cost (rs. 7500/-) on 08.10.2009, the respondents in the ta moved two mas which were dismissed on few more occasions in the past and the direction of the tribunal was not implemented. even they have not been paid the cost of rs.1000/- imposed on the .....

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 27 2012 (TRI)

Satish Kumar Vs. the Secretary, Ministry of Health and Welfare, New De ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Jan-27-2012

g. george paracken: 1. this is the second round of litigation by the applicant. earlier he had approached this tribunal vide oa 619/2010 seeking a direction to the respondents to count his ad hoc service for purposes of acp scheme and pensionary benefits. this tribunal vide annexure a-7 order dated 09.07.2010 disposed of the said oa observing that the applicant had not made any prayer to count his ad hoc service as regular service for all purposes. however, he was given liberty to raise his grievance afresh. accordingly, the applicant has filed this o.a. seeking the following reliefs: (i) to quash the order dated 07.11.2009 wherein the applicants request has been rejected vide a bald and cryptic order. (ii) respondents may be directed to count the applicants service rendered on ad hoc basis as regular service for the purpose of acp scheme and pensionary benefits. (iii) grant the appointment of the applicant from the date of his ad hoc appointment as the same has been followed by the regular appointment; and (iv) may also pass any further order (s), directions as be deemed just and proper to meet the ends of justice. 2. according to the applicant, he was initially appointed on 29.02.1988 as a radiographer on ad hoc basis in the pay scale of rs.1350-2200 vide annexure a-2 office order dated 07.03.1988 and later he along with a similarly placed person, namely, shri mahender kumar was declared regular w.e.f. 12.01.1995 and 20.01.1995 respectively vide annexure a-5 office .....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 09 2012 (TRI)

Smt. Neetu Gupta Vs. Government of Nct Delhi, Through Its Chief Secret ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Aug-09-2012

order mr. sudhir kumar, member (a): 1. oa no.4586/2011 with ma no.385/2012 was heard on 12.04.2012 and reserved for orders. oas no. 2857/2011, 2858/2011 and 2961/2011 were also heard the very next day on 13.04.2012 and reserved for orders. the subject matter of these four cases being the same, and this being the third round of adjudication before this tribunal, they are being disposed of through a common order. 2. the issue in these four cases is that if the applicant against a particular advertisement for the post of a teacher, which prescribes a specific qualification of bachelors degree in a subject to have been obtained before the cut off date, (which is normally the last date for filing of applications by any candidate), with studies in the relevant subject (for teaching which the application has been filed) having been prescribed to have been included in all the three years of the course of studies of the prescribed bachelors degree, can be considered to be eligible for consideration for appointment as a teacher against that subject specific post, even if he or she had not fulfilled the basic prescribed criteria of having studied the concerned subject in all the three years of the bachelors degree course, but had subsequently caught up with the required essential qualification, by undertaking a compressed (normally one year) advanced course subsequently, in which all the papers of all the three years. bachelors degree course of that particular subject were taken by .....

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 12 2012 (TRI)

Rakesh Kumar Vs. the Union of India Through the Foreign Secretary/Secr ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Decided on : Apr-12-2012

dr. ramesh chandra panda, member (a): 1. shri rakesh kumar, the applicant in the oa, is an indian foreign service (ifs) officer of 1972 batch. the instant oa is the 3rd round of litigation of the applicant mainly on his grievance against the parallel departmental inquiry initiated in the charge memorandum dated 01.04.2008 (annexure-a1) and seeking the same to be kept in abeyance till the completion of the trial of the applicant in the criminal court on the charge sheet number 12/2007 dated 24.12.2007 filed by the central bureau of investigation (cbi in short) to prosecute him for the offences under section 120 b of ipc read with section 420, 468 and 471 of the ipc and under section 13(2) with sub section 13(1) (d) of the prevention of corruption act, 1988 (poc act), as both are based on same sets of facts, allegations, documents and witnesses. 2. his first visit to the tribunal was in the oa no.1876/2008 which was decided on 22.12.2009. the tribunal in the said oa considered the facts that the criminal investigation against him was pending and fir was already lodged which set the law in motion. the impugned order dated 02.07.2008 was found to be unreasoned and non-speaking and the case was remanded back to the disciplinary authority for fresh decision on his representation in accordance with law after giving an opportunity of hearing to the applicant. it was inter alia directed not to take any action in the disciplinary case till the decision was taken on his representation. .....

Tag this Judgment!


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //