Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: central administrative tribunal cat jabalpur Page 2 of about 29 results (0.157 seconds)

Apr 07 2004 (TRI)

Ramesh Chandra Sharma, I.P.S. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2004)(3)SLJ205CAT

1. The applicant has filed this Original Application claiming the following main reliefs - "(b) quash the decision of the DPC held on 11.12.1998 declining to make any change in the select list of 1991. (c) the respondents be commanded to promote the petitioner to the IPS cadre from 1987, as submitted above, or in the alternative from 1991 in view of the decision of the Tribunal given in the previous O. A.No. 1997 1995. (d) the respondents may please be commanded to give the petitioner advantages of senior scale and selection grade after calculating the proforma promotion from 1987 or 1991 in the cadre of IPS with all financial benefits," 2. The brief admitted facts of the case are that the applicant was a member of the State Police Service. He was appointed as Dy. Supdt. of Police with effect from 10.10.1979. He was eligible for induction to the Indian Police Service (for short 'IPS') under the IPS (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955. A selection committee meeting was held on...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 27 2004 (TRI)

M.P. Administrative Service Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2004)(3)SLJ321CAT

1. Since the issue involved in all the above cases is common and the facts and the grounds raised arc identical, for the sake of convenience, these O.As. are being disposed of by this common order.2. O.A. No. 597/1998 will be treated as a leading case, in which the applicants have claimed the reliefs, to declare the following provisions of the I.A.S. (Recruitment) Rules, 1954 as ultra vires of the Constitution: 8.1 Rule 8(2) which states that "The Central Government may, in special circumstances and on the recommendation of the State Government concerned and in consultation with the Commission and in accordance with such regulations as the Central Government may, after consultation with the State Governments and the Commission, from time to time, make, recruit to the Service any person of outstanding ability and merit serving inconnection with the affairs of the State who is not a member of the State Civil Service or that State (but who holds a gazetted post in a substantive capacity)...

Tag this Judgment!

Feb 17 2004 (TRI)

Rajendra Kumar Vishnoi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ12CAT

1. The above O.A. has been filed by the applicant seeking the following main reliefs: (ii) Set aside the promotion order of the respondent No. 4 as Assistant in pursuance to the D.P.C. held on 30.7.1993. (iii) direct the respondents to take DPC/Review DPC to consider the case of the applicant w.e.f. 7.12.1993 with all consequential benefits. (iv) direct the respondents to give consequential benefits to the applicant by treating him absorbed as U.D.C. in the Tribunal at par with other similarly situated employee such as Shri Dave, Vandhey and others, and (v) Any, other order/orders which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper may also be passed.2. The first respondent has framed the rules called "Central Administrative Tribunal (Group 'B' and 'C Miscellaneous Posts) Recruitment Rules, 1989. Under the said recruitment rules, 62 posts of Assistant were notified to be filled up by selection. Clause 5 under the said recruitment rules, reads as under:- (1) Notwithstanding anything co...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 20 2002 (TRI)

Pawan Kumar Shrivastava Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ293CAT

1. The applicant is aggrieved by order dated 19.12.2000 (Annexure-A-6).By this impugned order, the appellate authority has reduced the penalty from removal from service to that of stoppage of annual increments for a period of six year from the date the applicant is reinstated as Upper Division Clerk. This impugned order further states that the absence from 24.7.1992 to the date of reinstatement will be treated as dies-non. The applicant is further aggrieved by order dated 4.1.2001 (Annexure-A-9) whereby the respondents have rejected the applicant's request dated 3.1.2001 (Annexure-A-8). By this impugned order (Annexure-A-9) the applicant has been informed that the competent authority had never permitted him to enrol/register with the Bar Association as an Advocate. Therefore, the applicant could not be permitted to join duty without cancellation of enrolment/registration as an Advocate.2. The applicant while posted as Upper Division Clerk in the office of Director, Regional Medical Re...

Tag this Judgment!

Sep 19 2002 (TRI)

Balmukund Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ370CAT

1. The applicant is aggrieved by the punishment order dated 21.9.1993 of compulsory retirement from Government service and the appellate order dated 27.4.1994 and revisional order dated 17.6.1996 which were passed in pursuance to the issue of charge-sheet dated 8.1.1992 (Annexure-A-1). Therefore, he has asked for quashing of these orders of charge-sheet, punishment order, appellate order and revisional order; and reinstatement in service with back wages along with interest.2. The applicant was appointed as Postman on 26.1.1969. In due course, he was promoted to the Postal Assistant Cadre with effect from 1.9.1978 and at the relevant time he was working as Assistant Treasurer (Stamp), Indore, Yashwant Road City Head Office with effect from 19.6.1991.2.1 As per charge-sheet dated 8.1.1992 (Annexure-A-1), three articles of charges were framed against the applicant. The first charge was that the applicant "kept the stamp balances short by Rs. 20,000/- which was noticed on 24.9.1991. Shri ...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 05 2002 (TRI)

Vinod Modi Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ306CAT

1. This application is made against the order dated 9/14.3.2000 (Annexure-A-1) by which it has been communicated to the applicant that "the proposal for permanent absorption of Deputy Registrars in CAT has been dropped due to the notification of amended Recruitment Rules for the post of Deputy Registrar w.e.f. 23.2.2000". The applicant has also assailed the order dated 8.5.2002 (Annexure-A-2) in which it has been communicated that the applicant is repatriated to his parent department, Govt. of Madhya Pradesh, Department of Housing and Environment, Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh with effect from 8.7.2002 (AN) on completion of present tenure (Fifth year) of deputation.2. It is stated by the applicant that he joined service in Madhya Pradesh Government on 6.9.1982 and while he was posted as Estate Officer in Dewas Development Authority, he applied for transfer on deputation to the post of Deputy Registrar in the Central Administrative Tribunal. The applicant, on being selected on deputation, joi...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 30 2001 (TRI)

Ramnath Sen Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

Reported in : (2003)(2)SLJ48CAT

1. The applicant is aggrieved of the order dated 29.3.2000 (Annexure-A-1) whereby he has been served with a notice to vacate the Govt. accommodation occupied by him, and also of the order dated 6.4.2000 (Annexure-A-2) whereby a charge-sheet under Rule 16 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1964, has been issued to him on the allegation of subletting the accommodation and in relief, he has prayed for quashing the said orders as also the directions to stop the recovery of panel rent and for refund of the amount already recovered. 2.1 He allotted Qr. No. TC/25 in JUL '76 and he is continuously residing in the said quarter peacefully. Some of the residents of the colony, having animogity with him, made a false complaint of sub-letting the quarter. Without inquiring about the truth of the complaint, respondents imposed the penal rent on him and started recovery Rs. 1053/- p.m. from the salary of the applicant w.e.f. DEC '97, as may be seen from Annexure-A-3. 2.2 Based on his representation, respondent No....

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 29 1999 (TRI)

P.K. Chakravorty Vs. Government of India and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

1. Applicant's claim for relief of pro-rata retirement benefits has been denied by the respondents on the following grounds namely--(i) that ihe benefit is not available to those absorbed in State Government Undertakings as mentioned in impugned order at Annexure-7; (ii) that the absorption of permanent Central Government servants should have taken place after the "cut off date of 9.1.1984 in terms of Government of India's O.M. No. 4(5) Pension Unit/79 dated 9.1.1984 as at Annexure-A-2 impugned; (iii) that the cases of Government servants who had been absorbed in Autonomous Bodies before the aforesaid "cut off date are not to be re-opened as at Annexure-A-8 challenged; and (iv) Applicant's claim for pension because of having rendered 12 years' service is not based on facts and that the conditions of two years' lien with the Geological Survey of India (GSI for short) has not been fulfilled.2. The applicant has staked his claim of pro-rata pension in this O. A.on the strength of the pro...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 27 1999 (TRI)

Sh. Khusi Lal and ors. Vs. the Director General, Icar and

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

1. All the seven applicants herein under the respondent No. 3 i.e.Central Institute of Agricultural Engineering (C.I.A.E. for short) are aggrieved by the respondents' inaction of not regularising their services in spite of working with lhat organisation for about 25 years.It is the claim of the applicants that they have a right to be regularised in view of the different circulars of the Government of India and recommendations of Dr. J.Prasad Committee which offered suggestions for absorption of the officials like the applicants herein.The applicants would contend that the work they are doing is of perennial nature and the fact that they are continuing to do the work for 25 years is good enough to indicate that the posts are of regular nature. By not regularising the services of the applicants, the respondents could be held responsible of violating the right guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution. It is also the claim of the applicants that they are being denied regular pay sc...

Tag this Judgment!

Aug 26 1999 (TRI)

Acchhelal Jharia Vs. the Director General, Central

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Jabalpur

1. The short question that arises for determination in this O.A. is as to whether on the concept of undue and inordinate delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings, the same could be held as having been vitiated.2. Before we examine the different aspects of the aforesaid legal issue it would be apposite to indicate, in brief, the background facts so as to appreciate the issues involved.3. The applicant, a Upper Division Clerk (Cashier) was placed under suspension on 26.10.1979 because of his alleged involvement in a criminal case. He was prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 409 of the I.P.C. After trial the Criminal Court acquitted the applicant on merits by order dated 7.12.1995. The applicant thereafter preferred an application for his reinstatement by revoking the suspension. The respondents however, had earlier preferred an appeal against the aforesaid judgment of the Trial Court before the Hon' ble High Court/Indore Bench through an Appeal No. 147/97. This appeal ...

Tag this Judgment!


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