Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: central administrative tribunal cat delhi Page 8 of about 1,807 results (0.168 seconds)

Jun 01 2012 (TRI)

Ashok Kumar Aggarwal Vs. Union of India Through Secretary, Department ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A): The applicant, Shri Ashok Kumar Aggarwal, a 1985 Batch of Indian Revenue Service (Income Tax) Officer having put in 14 years of service was placed under suspension in 1999 subsequent to registration of two criminal cases against him and consequently getting arrested on two occasions once on 23.12.1999 and second time on 19.10.2000. However, the suspension order of the officer was quashed by this Tribunal in OA No. 783/2000 on 17.01.2003 granting opportunity to the respondents to pass fresh order as appropriate based on facts of the case and the second suspension order was issued almost back to back in the sense that the revocation of suspension was passed on 25.04.2003 and on the same day a fresh suspension order was issued. Since then the applicant has been continuing under suspension. It is the applicant’s case that against the said order he filed OA No. 1105/2003 which was dismissed. Against the Tribunal’s order he moved the Ho...

Tag this Judgment!

May 30 2012 (TRI)

Jai Bhagwan Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER (ORAL) Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) In both these OAs since the facts are common, even the counsel representing both the parties are common, therefore, with their consent both the OAs are being disposed of by a common order. For the purpose of narrating facts, OA No.1758/2011 is taken as a lead case.       2.   In OA 1758/2011, applicant was served with a charge sheet dated 1.9.2012 with the following allegations:- “ Shri Jai Bhagwan while working as DMS-II Sec.D/SSB during the year 2010 committed irregularities as under:- He failed to maintain his stock properly. The details of shortages found in his stock as a result of Account Stock-Verification are as under:- “Table” By the above act of omission and commission, he failed to maintain absolute integrity, displayed lack of devotion of duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Railway Servant thereby contravened Ruled 3.1 (i), (ii) and (iii) of Railway Services (C...

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2012 (TRI)

Hemant Kumar Rai and Another Vs. the Union of India and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER Mrs. Meera Chhibber, Member (J) 1. In both these OAs since the facts are common, even the counsel representing both the parties are common, therefore, with their consent both the OAs are being disposed of by a common order. For the purpose of narrating facts, OA No.3832/2010 is taken as a lead case. 2. Applicant has challenged order dated 28.9.2011 (page 18) whereby it was decided by the Chairman, National Technical Research Organisation (hereinafter referred to as NTRO), to repatriate him to his parent department with immediate effect. He has also challenged order dated 19.11.2011 whereby his request for continuing them in NTRO has been rejected. He has further sought a direction to the respondents to reconsider his recruitment on a direct recruitment basis or in the alternate direct the respondents to continue the period of deputation until absorption takes place. 3. The brief facts, as stated by the applicant, are that an advertisement was issued by the respondents on 7-13 Apr...

Tag this Judgment!

May 29 2012 (TRI)

Vir Singh Vs. the Commissioner, Kendriya Vidayalaya Sangathan, New Del ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER (ORAL) : Justice S.C. Sharma, Acting Chairman : The instant OA has been instituted for the following reliefs:- “A)To direct the respondent to:- a)to stop the further deductions of Rs.1000/- per month from the Pension of the applicant immediately and to refund the illegal deductions made w.e.f. 18.3.2011 continuously every month as against the orders passed by the disciplinary authority was only the token cut of Rs.1000/- which covers the period from 18.2.2011 to 17.3.2011 only. The respondent be further directed to say the interest on the amount illegally withheld till date at the rate of 18% per annum till payment and to pass any other or further order, directions or relief in favour of the applicant and against the respondent which this Hon’ble court may deem just and proper under the circumstances of the case To award the costs of the present petition in favour of the applicant and against the respondents.” 2. Pleadings of the parties in brief are as follows....

Tag this Judgment!

May 28 2012 (TRI)

Manjeet Sharma and Others Vs. Union of India and Others

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER on Interim Relief Per Mr. Sudhir Kumar, Member (A) 1. The 57 applicants of this OA were all appointed in the Govt. of India Press, Aligarh, which falls within the jurisdiction of the Lucknow Bench of this Tribunal. Official respondents 1 and 2, and the private Respondent No.3, though being placed at New Delhi, the immediate official superior of all the applicants was the Respondent No.4, i.e., the Manager, Govt. of India Press, Aligarh. However, since in view of the past history of the associated cases having been entertained at this Bench of the Tribunal, and thereafter by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi, notices were issued in this case on the very first date of listing of the case on 09.05.2012, we do not have to allude to the aspect of territorial jurisdiction of this Principal Bench of the Tribunal at this stage. 2.   A large number of vacancies existed in a number of Presses of the Union of India in the year 2007. The Respondent No.4, the Manager, Govt. of I...

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 2012 (TRI)

Om Prasad S/O Late Sh. Devi Singh Vs. Union of India Through the Secre ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER The applicant is working as Data Entry Operator Grade ‘B’ in the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation, under the Respondent No.3. He is aggrieved at denial of the first ACP to him on completion of 12 years of service w.e.f. 1.8.1999. The respondents have instead granted the applicant second Financial Upgradation under the ACP scheme on completion of 24 years of service. The representation of the applicant has been rejected vide the impugned order dated 26.08.2010. By way of relief, the OA seeks quashing the impugned order along with directions to the respondents for grant of two financial upgradations to the applicant under the ACP Scheme w.e.f. 09.08.1999. Para 8 (ii) of the OA has prayed for the following relief :- 8 (ii) That the Hon’ble Tribunal may further graciously be pleased to pass an order directing the respondents to grant first financial upgradation under ACP scheme w.e.f. 9.8.99, after not treating the redesignation of post as a promo...

Tag this Judgment!

May 25 2012 (TRI)

Mithan Lal S/O Shri Chiranji Lal Vs. Delhi Transport Corporation, Thro ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

ORDER Shri G. George Paracken: 1. The applicant in this Original Application is aggrieved by the impugned orders (i) dated 06.12.1995 passed by the Respondent No. 3 in his capacity as the disciplinary authority imposing upon him the penalty of removal from service and (ii) dated 02.12.2011 passed by the Respondent No.2 in his capacity as the appellate authority rejecting his appeal and upholding the order of the disciplinary authority. 2. The brief facts necessary for adjudication of this case are delineated hereunder. Based on a complaint by one Shri Pratap Singh Maurya dated 26.04.1995, the applicant was charge-sheeted, vide the respondents Memo No. HND-1/AI (T)/95/70 dated 12.06.1995. The allegations against him were as under: “That on 20/21.04.1995 when you were on duty at Bus No. 6482 route No. 082, a passenger in the morning on 21.04.1995 at about 03.10 has boarded your bus. You misbehaved with that passenger at I.S.B.T. while getting down from the bus. By using force you g...

Tag this Judgment!

May 23 2012 (TRI)

Ravinder Kumar, Ips (Retired) Vs. Union of India Through Home Secretar ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A): 1. Shri Ravinder Kumar an Indian Police Service (IPS) Officer of Himachal Pradesh Cadre belonging to 1977 batch has been aggrieved by the presidential penalty order dated 13.08.2009 (Annexure A-2) as per which he has been compulsorily retired from service in terms of Rule 6 (1) of the All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969. He is also aggrieved by the Charge Memo that was issued to him on 28.03.1995 (Annexure A-1) in which disciplinary proceedings were instituted against the applicant under Rule 8 read with Rule 7 of the All India Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969. Feeling aggrieved by the penalty order and the Charge Memo, he has instituted this OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 with the following prayers:- “a) Quash and set aside the impugned Memorandum dated 28.03.1995 (Annexure A-1) as illegal and non-est, ab-initio or deem it lapsed in view of the Tribunal order dated 26.11.2002 Annexu...

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 2012 (TRI)

inspector (Exe.) Anil Kumar Vs. Union of India Through Secretary (Home ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A) 1. Inspector (Executive) Anil Kumar, the applicant herein, has instituted the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 with following prayers:- “(i) Quash and set aside the impugned orders issued by Commissioner of Police, Delhi vide U.O. No.37102-104/CB-VII/PHQ dated 22.6.2011 as at Annexure A-1. Direct the respondents to consider the applicant for promotion to the next higher rank of ACP by ignoring the below bench mark grading in the ACRs for the period from 1.4.2004 to 31.3.2005, 1.4.2005 to 7.3.2006 and 3.9.2007 to 25.2.2008 as the same were not communicated to the applicant when D.P.C. was held in 2008 for promotion in MHA. Award the costs of the proceedings; and Pass any other or further order/direction which this Hon’ble Tribunal deem fit and proper in favour of the applicant and against the respondents in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 2. Brief facts of the case whi...

Tag this Judgment!

May 22 2012 (TRI)

K.N. Sharma Vs. R.K. Singh Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, North ...

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Delhi

Dr. Ramesh Chandra Panda, Member (A): 1. In the order of this Tribunal dated 14.11.2011 in OA No. 1887.2010 the impugned order dated 29.06.2009, wherein the applicant was inflicted with the penalty of 10% cut in monthly pension for a period of two years, was quashed and the matter was remitted back to the disciplinary authority to pass a fresh order within a period of three moths in the light of the Tribunal’s observation. The pertinent part of the order is extracted below:- “7. Disciplinary authority in an ultimate analysis has held that the applicant has failed to discharge his duties properly and diligently and also failed to ensure that his subordinates completed all due processes before signing the certificate. Disciplinary authority has also held that the misconduct indulged in by the applicant would constitute grave misconduct. Even though in the findings given by the UPSC and the disciplinary authority, there is no reason as to why, despite the applicant may have be...

Tag this Judgment!


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