Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: central administrative tribunal cat mumbai Page 8 of about 120 results (0.135 seconds)

Sep 14 2004 (TRI)

Chandrakant Shankarrao Marne Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(2)SLJ104CAT

1. The present O.A. is filed for quashing and setting aside the removal order dated 11.10.2000 passed by the Disciplinary Authority and the appellate order dated 1.3.2002 confirming the order of the Disciplinary Authority and directing the respondents to reinstate the applicant with effect from 11.10.2000 with full pay and allowances etc.2. The applicant's case is that he was appointed in the office of Inspectorate of Armaments, Khadki as an orderly on 5.3.1983. He was transferred and posted at Ammunition Factory, Khadki on merger on 22.10.1984. He was removed from service without any enquiry or chargesheet or departmental enquiry on 7.7.1987. The applicant had preferred an appeal against the removal order. The appeal was not disposed of and he filed an O.A.No. 386/1988 against the removal order.The said O.A. was disposed of on 25.2.1991 with direction to dispose of the appeal within two months. The Appellate Authority rejected the appeal by its order dated 16.4.1991. The applicant fi...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 29 2004 (TRI)

Ranjit Kumar Sahay Vs. State of Maharashtra and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(3)SLJ296CAT

1. Applicant Shri Ranjit Kumar Sahay, an IPS officer, of Maharashtra Cadre has filed two O.A. Nos. 2129/03 and 2133/03 for expunction of adverse remarks given to him in ACRs for the year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001 respectively. Although the wordings of the adverse remarks in both the years are different but since the issues and legal principles involved for judicial review are same, we propose to dispose of both the O.As. by this common order.2. In O.A. No. 2129/03 the applicant has prayed for expunction of adverse remarks given to him in the ACR for 1999-2000. The applicant has stated that on his representation to the State Government, only a few of the adverse remarks have been expunged. His contention is that all adverse remarks should have been expunged. The relief sought in Para 8(i) is for "quashing the part which is against the applicant and maintaining which is in favour of the applicant". He has further prayed for declaration that the adverse remarks are the outcome of malice ha...

Tag this Judgment!

Jul 23 2004 (TRI)

R.B. Kamble Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ389CAT

1. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 to challenge the order dated 10.12.2001 of Disciplinary Authority imposing the penalty of compulsory retirement, which was upheld by order dated 26.2.2002 of the Appellate Authority and order dated 19.6.2002 of the Revisional Authority and has prayed for quashing and setting aside the above orders.2. The applicant at the relevant time was working as Junior Booking Clerk at the booking office of Vikhroli on 29.10.1997 in shift 0700 hours to 1500 hours on window No. 5, was involved in a trap by the vigilance team. A memorandum was issued on 19.1.1998 by Assistant Commercial Manager on the following charges: "Article I: He irregularly overcharged the decoy passengers by Rs. 8/- (Rs. Eight) on the sale of one II/O/Retn. ticket Ex. VK to ABH and one II/O/Retn. VK to Shelu/ Vashind. Article II: He was found with an excess of Rs. 21.75 (Rs. Twenty one and paise seventy five) in the Railwa...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 22 2004 (TRI)

M. Guruprasad Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(3)SLJ328CAT

1. The present O. A. is filed for directing the respondents not to conduct the departmental inquiry till a decision in criminal proceedings is reached.2. The applicant is working as Travelling Ticket Examiner in the Mumbai Division of Central Railway. On 22/23.4.2003 the applicant was on duty in train No. 1093 Dn. According to the applicant a decoy check was conducted by incompetent persons in contravention of the Rules in the Vigilance Manual. As per Vigilance Inspectors version the applicant was accosted at Kasara Station on 23.04.2003 and sought to show the personal and Railway cash. The applicant refused to cooperate with the Vigilance Inspectors. The applicant with a view to avoid detection, pushed the Vigilance Inspectors and the independent witnesses and threatened the Vigilance Inspector. The chargesheet was issued to the applicant. The chargesheet mentioned that the Vigilance Department had a source of information that Travelling Ticket Examiners in train No.1093 Dn. were col...

Tag this Judgment!

Jun 16 2004 (TRI)

Ajai Kumar JaIn Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ377CAT

1. The present O.A. is filed for quashing the order of suspension of the applicant dated 17.6.2000 and issuing direction to respondents to allow him to reinstate and join service of Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Region, Mumbai with immediate effect and the arrears of subsistence allowance as per Rules with effect from 17.6.2000 along with interest at the rate of 15% per annum.2. The applicant's case is that he joined the Indian Police Service (IPS) in the year 1982 as a Supy. Asstt. Superintendent of Police and was confirmed into IPS on 1.9.1984. He was working as an Additional Commissioner of Police, Central Division, Mumbai at the relevant time.He was served with the suspension order on or about 18.6.2000. He could know about the reasons only after going through the FIR filed by one Sanjiv Kokil, an Inspector attached to the Byculla Police Station, which falls within the administrative jurisdiction of Byculla Division headed by Assistant Commissioner of Police falling u...

Tag this Judgment!

May 27 2004 (TRI)

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

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ104CAT

1. The applicant is a 1969 batch I.R.S. Officer. In 1986 he was promoted as Additional Commissioner and was posted at the relevant time as Additional Commissioner of Customs, Mangalore. According to the applciant, an information was received by one Shri K.A. Nayar, Appraising Officer that an Arab Dhow carrying 8 M.Ts of contraband silver had left Dubai on 9.12.1990 and was en route to Mangalore. DRI-I i.e. information report in regard to that was sent to Collector of Customs, Bangalore. The Arab Dhow was intercepted on the high seas on the night of 17/18th December, 1990. The informer was entitled to a reward of Rs. 1000/- per kg of silver seized and therefore, Nayar vide his letter dated 8.3.1991 to the applicant requested to recommend the reward to the Informer. The applicant recommended to the Collector of Customs, Bangalore for disbursal of Rs. 87,77,000/- to the Informer.After the issue of this letter dated 22.3.1991, the applciant was issued a charge sheet dated 7.8.1995. The fo...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2004 (TRI)

N.V. Kalyankar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ334CAT

1. Aggrieved by the order dated 22.01.2004 issued by Respondent No. 3 transferring the applicant from Nagpur to Pune, the applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The applicant has prayed for quashing and setting aside the impugned orders dated 22.01.2004 and 23.01.2004.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the applicant is a Group-A officer working as Senior Superintendent of Post Officers, Mofussil Division, Nagpur. The applicant was transferred from place to place by the respondents frequently from 20.10.1997 to 05.02.2000. They have also transferred the applicant from Nagpur Mofussil Division on 25.4.2003. The applicant was transferred from 1990 to 2003 for near about 14 occasions, There has been frequent transfers by the respondents he has never objected to such transfer and sincerely obeyed the orders of the respondents. Now he has been transferred from Nagpur to Pune by order dated 22.01.2004 issued by Respondent No...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 21 2004 (TRI)

N.M. Pardeshi Vs. Employees' State Insurance

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ304CAT

1. The present O.A. is filed for a declaration that the charge-sheet dated 7.4.2000 has been issued illegally and mala fide and is liable to be -quashed and set aside and to declare further continuation of the disciplinary proceedings under charge sheet dated 7.4.2000 as illegal and to close the disciplinary proceedings and directing the respondents to pay the applicant his retiral dues, including the gratuity, leave encashment, commutation of pension and salary for the month of October, 2002 with interest @ 18% per annum from the due dale.2. The applicant was working as an Insurance Inspector/Superintendent in the Finance and Accounts Branch in Mumbai. He superannuated from service at the age of 60 years from the E.S.I.C. with effect from 31.10.2002. A charge sheet dated 7.4.2000 was issued to him alleging that he partly sublet the residential accommodation given to him to one Mr. Dalvinder Sohal. He had denied the charges. One Shri. A.W. Khadgi was appointed as an Enquiry Officer. H...

Tag this Judgment!

Apr 08 2004 (TRI)

Dr. B.V. Prasad Reddy Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ61CAT

1. Aggrieved by the action of the respondents in not promoting the applicant to the post of Joint Commissioner of Income-tax, the applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 190 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985. The applicant has sought the following reliefs : (a) This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the respondents and after examining the same quash and set aside the impugned order dated 20.10.2003. (b) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to hold and declare that any grading in the confidential reports of the applicant where steep downfall is seen and/or which is below the benchmark should be ignored. (c) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the respondents to conduct a review DPC and promote the applicant to the post of Joint Commissioner of Income-tax from the date of promotion of his immediate junior with all consequential benefits. (e) Any other and further order as this Hon'ble Tribu...

Tag this Judgment!

Mar 19 2004 (TRI)

D.P. Kholamkar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2005)(1)SLJ175CAT

1. This O.A. has been filed by the applicant D.P. Kholamkar under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act for quashing and setting the order of respondents imposing a penalty of 40% (forty per cent) cut in his monthly pension.2. The facts of the case in brief are as follows. The applciant joined the Bombay Customs House as a Junior Clerk and thereafter was promoted as Senior Clerk. He was promoted as an Appraiser of Customs w.e.f.3.4.1995 and retired from service on reaching the age of superannuation on 31.7.1995. He was served with a chargesheet after a gap of more than one year of retirement levelling following charges: "(a) That while examining 10% of the packages (as per the examination order) all the 13 shipping bills mentioned therein, applicant had failed to mention in the examination report as to actual which packages were selected by him for physical examination. (b) That he failed to notice that non-declaration of market value in the exporters declaration pasted with ...

Tag this Judgment!


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