Skip to content


Latest Cases Home > Latest Court: central administrative tribunal cat mumbai Page 9 of about 120 results (0.136 seconds)

Jan 02 2004 (TRI)

B.L. Dholpuria and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(3)SLJ312CAT

1. The grievance of the applicants is that the respondents have conducted the selection for promotion to the post of Law Assistant in violation of the various orders of the Railway Board and have published on 01.01.2003. Hence, they have filed this OA under Section 19 of the A.T. Act seeking following reliefs:- (a) This Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case which led to issuance of the panel dated 01.01.2003 and after going through its propriety, legality and constitutional validity, be pleased to quash and set aside the panel dated 01.01.2003 issued under Order No.E/Legal/1025/4/27 Vol. IV issued by Respondent No. 2. (b) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to direct the respondents to conduct a fresh selection to the post of Law Assistant. (e) Any other and further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit proper and necessary in the circumstances of the case.2. The facts of the case in brief are that the applicant No. 1 is working ...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 18 2002 (TRI)

P. Dhanpal Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ289CAT

1. Applicant aggrieved by A1 order dated 15.11.99 by which his plea to protect the post of Assistant Newsreel Officer in Group-B as a separate cadre was rejected and A-4 order dated 12.8.99 by which the post of Assistant Newsreel Officer Group-B was downgraded to a Group-C cadre of Assistant Cameraman without considering the representation made by the applicant and A-5 order dated 7.1.99 by which the Government approved the merger of the posts of Newsreel Officer with the post of Chief Cameraman and redesignated the same as Chief Cameraman, filed this O.A.seeking the following reliefs: (i) To quash Annexures A1, A4, A5 and to declare that merging the cadre of Assistant Newsreel Officer (Group-B) with a lower Group(C) post is illegal. (ii) To direct that the applicant is entitled to continue in a Group-B post or in a similar cadre and not liable to be downgraded to a Group-C post. (iii) To direct the respondents to remove the anomaly if necessary by prescribing quota in promotion for e...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2002 (TRI)

Sh. Vasudev Ganesh Gokhale Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ49CAT

1. The applicant has impugned the action and letters issued by the respondents dated 29.8.1996, 4.9.1996 and 30.8.1996 (Annexures A-1, A-2 and A-3), respectively. By these orders, the respondents have ordered and recovered the over payments made to the applicant since 1988 which the applicant has submitted has been done from his retirement dues.2. The brief relevant facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed as Carriage and Wagon Khalasi with the respondents on casual basis on 13.3.1957. He was regularised on 1.10.1957. He was later promoted as Car Attendant in 1961 and as Ticket Collector in 1963. He has stated that he was thereafter, promoted as Guard in 1974 and retired from service in that post on superannuation on 31.8.1996.3. Mr. D.V. Gangal, learned Counsel for the applicant has submitted that just two days before the applicant's date of retirement, the respondents have issued the letter dated 29.8.1996 and thereafter have recovered an amount of Rs. 56,008/from the ...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2002 (TRI)

Dionisio N.F. Carvalho Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ152CAT

1. By the present O.A. the applicant is challenging the notification dated 11.10.2001 issued by Respondent No. 1 appointing Respondent No. 4 i.e. V.T. Thomas of the State Forest Service of Goa to the Indian Forest Service with immediate effect.2. The applicant was initially appointed as Assistant Conservator of Forests on adhoc basis vide order dated 20.1.1987 and has been working as Assistant Conservator of Forests/Deputy Conservator of Forests in the Goa Forest Department. The applicant was appointed on regular basis as ACF from 8.8.1990 and was confirmed on 8.8.1992 vide order dated 1st September, 1999 after completion of two years of probation. The State Forest Service Assistant Conservator of Forests (ACF for short)/Deputy Conservator of Forests (DCF for short) is the feeder grade for promotion to the IFS, The promotion to the IFS from the feeder grade is regulated by the Indian Forest Service (Recruitment) Rules, 1966 and Indian Forest Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulati...

Tag this Judgment!

Dec 03 2002 (TRI)

Krishna Kumar Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ133CAT

1. This application is regarding promotion to the post of Additional Director General of Works in Military Engineering Service (MES). The applicant is aggrieved that he has not been promoted to the post of Additional Director General of Works which has been vacant since 1.7.2002 only on the ground that the applicant is left with less than three months of service before superannuation. He has therefore challenged the panel dated 6.9.2002 whereby two officers namely Shri Suresh Dhiman and Shri D.S. Saxena have been promoted.2. The applicant is Civilian Group 'A' officer of M.E.S. department of Ministry of Defence and is presently working as Chief Engineer and is posted in the office Panel of Arbitrators (Pune). He was directly appointed to the post of Assistant Executive Engineer in 1962 and was thereafter promoted as Executive Engineer, Superintending Engineer and Additional Chief Engineer in August 1988 and November, 1995 respectively. Finally he was promoted as Chief Engineer on 9/10...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 29 2002 (TRI)

Omprakash Dukhilal Yadav and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(3)SLJ370CAT

1. This is an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 for direction to the respondents to regularise the services of the applicants by taking into account the vacancies of all the Military Firms in Southern Command and by following common seniority lift and to restrain the respondents from terminating their services.2. By amendment of the O.A. the applicants have further sought the declaration that proposed action of the respondents in terminating the services of the applicants in pursuance of the order dated 15.12.2001 being illegal be quashed and respondents be restrained from terminating the services of the applicants as per order dated 15.12.2001.3. By a further amendment the declaration is sought is that proposed termination of services of the applicants and offer of job basis work being illegal be quashed and applicants have acquired temporary status.4. The applicants claimed that Applicant No. 1 Om Prakash Yadav, Applicant No. 2 Shiv Bhushan Yadav...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 22 2002 (TRI)

A.M. Gurav and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2003)(3)SLJ382CAT

1. The applicants in this O. A. are challenging the order dated 22.10.2001 issued by the Divisional Railway Manager, Solapur and further order dated 18/22.4.2002 by which the representations of the applicants have been rejected in regard to their seniority as Diesel Assistants and consequential seniority as Goods Driver and Senior Goods Driver.2. The applicants were selected as Apprentice Diesel Assistants in response to Employment Notice No. 07/89 by the Railway Recruitment Board. At the time, the selection took place, the pay scale of apprentice Diesel Assistant was Rs. 950-1,500. According to the letter of appointment, the applicants were required to undergo one year's training as apprentice Diesel Assistants. After which they were to be absorbed as Diesel Assistants against working post. The applicants have placed a copy of letter dated 18.5.1992 by which one of the applicants Shri Y.K. Ramesh Babu was informed about his selection pursuant to the recommendation by the Railway Recr...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 20 2002 (TRI)

Naresh K. Gupta Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(1)SLJ229CAT

1. The applicant in this case has come up to the Tribunal seeking reliefs as follows-- (a) This Hon'ble Tribunal will be pleased to call for the records of the case and after going through its propriety, legality and constitutional validity, be pleased to order and direct the Respondents to implement the advice as tendered by the CVC in the normal way, i.e. as received on or about 8.7.2002. (b) This Hon'ble Tribunal may further be pleased to declare that the action of the Respondents in sending back the case of the applicant to CVC is biased and be pleased to quash the same and order to close the subsequent proceedings. (c) Any other or further order as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit, proper and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case be passed.2. When the case was heard for admission on the initial date, interim orders were made to the effect that the Respondents are restrained from taking any action on the basis of second CVC report, if the said report is in respect...

Tag this Judgment!

Nov 10 2002 (TRI)

S.P. Mishra and ors. Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ44CAT

1. This application has been filed for a direction to the respondents to assign correct seniority to the applicant in the grade of Chargeman Grade-B (Junior Engineer Grade II). The applicants impugned the order dated 30.11.98 by which representation of Applicants No. 1 and 2 was rejected.2. The applicants were working as skilled artisans at the relevant time. According to the rule, they were entitled to appear for the selection as Intermediate Apprentices to be absorbed and posted as Chargeman Grade-B (redesignated as Junior Engineer Grade II). According to the recruitment rules, the post of Chargeman Grade-B is filled in 50% by direct recruitment, 25% by Intermediate Apprentices by holding selection from amongst skilled artisans of the Mechanical department and 25% by the rankers.3. The applicants applied for the post and appeared for the written test and the interview and they were selected by order dated 18.4.1992.4. As per procedure and rule, the Intermediate Apprentices have to u...

Tag this Judgment!

Oct 22 2002 (TRI)

S.P.S. Yadav Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and anr.

Court : Central Administrative Tribunal CAT Mumbai

Reported in : (2004)(2)SLJ150CAT

1. By this application, the applicant, who belongs to Indian Police Service, has challenged his repatriation to his parent cadre viz.Government of Maharashtra, from the post of Chief Vigilance Officer of Air India Limited at Mumbai, a Public Sector Undertaking owned and controlled by the Government of India.2. The facts of the case are that the applicant was appointed on deputation as Chief Vigilance Officer of Air India Limited, Mumbai by letter dated 29.11.2000. On 13.2.2001, the Government of India, Ministry of Civil Aviation, issued another letter in respect of terms and conditions for appointment on deputation. By said letter the term of deputation provided was that initially it is for a period of three years from the date of assumption of charge i.e. 8.12.2000 (FN) or until further orders whichever is earlier. Though the appointment of the applicant was for a period of three years but by letter dated 20.6.2002, the Ministry of Civil Aviation directed his premature repatriation a...

Tag this Judgment!


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