Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: central administrative tribunal cat ahmedabad Page 4 of about 124 results (0.133 seconds)

Mar 09 2004 (TRI)

Atresha Bipinchandra Hansraj and Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2004)(3)SLJ364CAT

1. All these O.As. raise common question of law and facts and hence, the same arc heard together and being disposed of by this common order.2. The applicants are diploma holders and their grievance is against the decision of the Railway Recruitment Board not to consider them eligible for recruitment to the post of Diesel/Electrical Assistant.According to their case pursuant to the Employment Notice No. 2/97-98 in the Employment News dated 21.7.97 for recruitment to the post of Diesel Assistant and Electrical Assistant, they had submitted their applications and on being called for the written test they had appeared in the written test. They were declared successful in the written test and hence, they were called for the psychological test. They were declared successful in both the tests and were called for the oral interview. However, the respondent No. 2 had refused to interview them on the ground that they were diploma holders and not ITI pass.According to them the respondent No. 2 d...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 09 2004 (TRI)

Mukundbhai Nandlal Chavda Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ37CAT

1. The applicant who was working as a Junior Telecom Officer at Rajkot was served with a minor penalty charge-sheet under Rules 16 of the CCS (CCA) Rules on dated 3.9.97 asking him to submit his representation within 10 days from the receipt of the charge memo. Before he could reply to the charge-sheet, he was served with a fresh charge-sheet on dated 8.9.97 levelling the same charges and imputations and informing that the charge memo dated 3.9.97 is treated as cancelled. The fresh charge-sheet was communicated to him vide letter dated 16.9.97. The applicant replied to the charges levelled against him vide his representation dated 22.9.97. The charges levelled against the applicant were that he had complained about the bogus signatures on MR No. 17, Book No. 95, Work Order No. 100 dated 4.12.93 by Mr. R.V.Sharma SDE, CXL, Rajkot. At the time of inquiry by V.O., O/o. C.G.M., MTCE WTR, Mumbai on 22.7.96 he was asked to name the person who had signed the above MR instead of the actual em...

Tag this Judgment!

Jan 12 2004 (TRI)

R.C. Yadav and anr. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ117CAT

1. A direct recruit Income Tax Inspector and promoted Income Tax Inspectors aggrieved with the draft seniority list dated 6.1.2003 published by the Chief Commissioner, Income Tax have filed O.As. 92/03 and 123/03 respectively. They have both amended the respective O.As. to challenge the final seniority list published during the pendency of the O.As. A common order will govern both these O.As.2. The case of the directly recruited Income Tax Inspector is that he is entitled to seniority from the date of vacancy as advised by Department of Personnel in the case of Income Tax Inspectors of Chief Commissioner I, New Delhi. In any case the Principal Bench of the Tribunal in O.A. 2307/99 & Ors., decided on 23.2.2000 has held that direct recruits are entitled to seniority from the date of their selection by Staff Selection Commission and not from the date of their appointment. The CBDT should have issued general guidelines to implement this decision. Chief Commissioner Jaipur has finalise...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 22 2003 (TRI)

Ramkripal Jagannath and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ205CAT

1. All these O.As. involve the same question of law and fact and the same relief is prayed for in all of them. We have heard them together and are disposing them of by this common order.2. This is the third round of litigation so far the applicants are concerned. All the applicants were initially engaged as casual labourers between years 1983 to 1987. They were conferred with temporary status and were subsequently, regularised. However, after they were regularised on receiving some intimation that they had obtained their engagement as casual labourers on fake labour cards, the Railway Administration initiated an inquiry against them. Charge sheets were issued to all the applicants in April, 1988 and the inquiry proceeded on the charges levelled against them. The Inquiry Officer in his report held that the charges against the applicants were proved and also observed that they were guilty of serious misconduct etc. The Disciplinary Authority accepted the findings of the Inquiry Officer ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 18 2003 (TRI)

J.J. Tekwani Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ251CAT

1. The applicant an ex-employee of the respondent No. 3 has approached this Tribunal with a prayed to quash and set aside the order dated 16.8.2001 imposing the penalty of 20% cut in his monthly pension for a period of 5 years. The penalty is imposed by the present acting as a Disciplinary Authority of the applicant. The applicant was served with a charge sheet by the Collector, C.C.E., Ahmedabad on dated 26th January, 1988. Prior to the service of the charge sheet he was suspended w.e.f. 14.1.87 but the suspension had come to be revoked on dated 2.5.1988 and an inquiry was conducted in the charges leveled against the applicant and vide his report dated 16.8.89 Inquiry Officer held the charges to be proved. The Disciplinary Authority after supplying the copy of the report of the Inquiry Officer to the applicant and after obtaining his representation thereon imposed the penalty of reduction of pay on the applicant from Rs. 2675 to Rs. 2450 for a period of two years without cumulative e...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 26 2003 (TRI)

B.C. Ganatra Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ45CAT

2. The applicant who retired as a Superintendent of Central Excise on 28.2.98 from the service of the respondents had filed O.A./635/98 in the first round inter alia for quashing the charge sheet issued to him vide Memo dated 5.2.1998 and payment of his retirement dues. While disposing of the O.A. on 25.6.99, the Tribunal had directed the respondents to complete the enquiry and pass necessary orders within four months failing which release all his retirement dues within eight weeks thereafter. However, as the enquiry was not completed, the applicant moved CP/71/99 and notice was issued. Pending the above proceedings, he received the report of the Inquiry Officer (I.O.) dated 8.1.2000 holding that the charges against him are not confirmed.Thereupon the Disciplinary Authority (D.A.) i.e. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Rajkot Orders on 10.8.2000 that the disciplinary proceedings initiated vide charge sheet dated 5.2.1998 have been dropped and Government's displeasure have be...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 12 2003 (TRI)

Sri. I.i. Ajab Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ372CAT

1. The applicant who is working as a Telegraph Operator under the respondents is aggrieved by the penalty imposed on him by the Disciplinary Authority (D.A.) vide order dated 2.1.1996 (Annexure A-26), the order dated 29.3.1996 (Annexure A-28) passed by the Appellate Authority (A.A.) and rejection of his review and revision petitions vide order dated 12.9.1996 (Annexure A-30) and dated 17.6.1998 (Annexure A-32) and has prayed that the said orders be quashed and set aside with all consequential benefits.2. According to the applicant, while he was working as a Telegraph Operator in the Central Telegraph Office, Rajkot, he was issued a charge-sheet vide Memo dated 23.9.1992 (Annexure A-1) levelling charges that he levelled wild and false allegations against the Senior Officers of the Department vide his letter dated 12.3.1992 and thereby acted in a manner unbecoming of a Government Servant in violation of Rules 3(i), (iii) of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. He gave his reply vide his represent...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 26 2003 (TRI)

Shri Mukhtiyarahmed Chundrigar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2005)(115)SLJ274CAT

1. The applicant who is working as Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax (DCIT) under the respondents is aggrieved on account of issue of a charge-sheet to him vide memo dated 21.2.2002 (Annexure A-5) and has prayed that the same be quashed and set aside.2. According to the applicant while he was working as Income Tax Officer (ITO) in Ward 6(1) Ahmedabad from 11.10.1991 to May, 1993 after having been transferred to Modasa the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) Ahmedabad invited the Inspection Division of CBD, New Delhi to carry out the inspection of the work done by him for the above period without issuing a show cause notice to him. He submitted his explanation on 16.8.1995 to the Inspection report of the CBD, New Delhi dated 12/13.4.1994. Meanwhile he was promoted as Assistant CIT in May, 1994 and as DCIT on 1.10.1997. He was however served with a charge-sheet dated 21.12.2002 to which he replied on 9.7.2002. An I.O. was appointed vide order dated 24.10.2002. Aggrieved by the issue of the...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 07 2003 (TRI)

R.P. Jadeja Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ138CAT

1. The applicant who was working as an Inspector of the Central Excise and Customs under the respondent No. 3 was served with a charge sheet on 5.12.94 under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1965 levelling imputations of misconduct as well as failure to maintain absolute integrity and devotion to duty and attempted to influence the DRI Officer etc., and on the applicant denying the charges levelled against him the departmental inquiry in the charges was held against him. The inquiry officer submitted his report on 23.5.97 and the same was communicated to the applicant on 23.7.97. The inquiry officer had held that out of the three charges leveled against the applicant two were proved and the third one was not proved. The applicant submitted his representation against the inquiry officer's report to the disciplinary authority on dated 5.9.97. The disciplinary authority thereupon imposed the punishment of dismissal from service on the applicant vide his order dated 7.10...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 2002 (TRI)

S.D. Sharma and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Ahmedabad

Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ269CAT

1. The applicants ten in number are all IAS Officers promoted from the Gujarat State Civil Service Officers' cadre. They are aggrieved by the seniority given to them in the IAS cadre as well as the year of allotment assigned to them vide Notification dated 16th July, 1996 and communication dated 17th April 1997 and seek the direction against the respondent Nos. 1 and 2 to see that while implementing the judgment in TA/43 of 1986 their position in the IAS cadre shown on the basis of the select list of 1979 as well as December 1986/January 19/87 should not be affected or changed in any manner. This litigation is a fall out of the earlier litigations and therefore a brief history of the earlier litigations will have to be recorded to understand the question involved in this O.A.2. The dispute of the seniority amongst the State Civil Service Officers had resulted into non-preparation of the select list for making appointment to the IAS cadre from the year 1974 onwards. The direct recruit ...

Tag this Judgment!


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