Central Administrative Tribunal

Jurisdiction/Issuing Court

Latest documents

• OA No. 060/00563/2017. Case: Karambeer S/o Sh. Leelu Ram Vs Union Territory of Chandigarh through Home Secretary and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  -- (i) The respondents be directed to re-conduct the height test of the applicant or be directed to appear before any Medical Board, which the respondents deem fit, to get the applicant's height re-measured particularly keeping in view the Medical Certificate dated 20.05.2017 (Annexure A-3) issued by Medanta Hospital, Gurgaon certifying that the he...

• Original Application No. 180/00125/2016. Case: P.K. Krishnankutty Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. Applicant is a Peon in the Railway Claims Tribunal, Ernakulam. He is aggrieved by non-reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred by him for treatment of his diabetic foot which according to him was advised by a private hospital in Ernakulam for amputation but got cured after undergoing treatment at Cheruppulassery Co-operative Hospital in Pa...

• Original Application No. 180/00474/2016. Case: M.K. Kutty Krishnan Nair Vs The Director, Central Institute of Fisheries Technology. Central Administrative Tribunal

  Applicant, a retired Technical Officer who was working under the respondents, is seeking full reimbursement of the medical expenses incurred by him for the treatment of his wife under the Central Services (Medical Attendance) Rules, 1944 [hereinafter referred to as the CS(MA) Rules]. His wife had undergone treatment for bilateral total knee replace...

• Original Application No.180/00338/2017. Case: Unnikrishnan T.V. Lower Division Clerk Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  2. The applicant has approached this Tribunal for a declaration that denial of promotion to the applicant from the cadre of Lower Division Clerk (LDC) to the cadre of Upper Division Clerk (UDC) is discriminatory and illegal and for a direction to be issued to the respondents to promote him to higher grade within a time frame. 3. The applicant is a...

• O.A. No.060/00571/2017. Case: Sanjiv Kaul and Ors. Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. Applicants Sanjiv Kaul (Regular Lecturer), Officer Incharge of Civil Engineering Department, Maninder Singh (Regular Lecturer), Officer Incharge of Department of Architecture Assistance Course, and Sukhdev Singh Bhogal (Regular Lecturer), Officer Incharge of Department of Production and Industrial Engineering, who are working in Chandigarh Colle...

• Original Applications N0. 060/00835/2016. Case: P.K. Sarin Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. The applicant joined as Junior Engineer on 02.08.1976 and was promoted as Assistant Engineer in the year 1984. He was allowed 2nd Assured Career Progression (ACP) in the scale of Rs. 10,000-325-15,200/- w.e.f. 1.7.2006. According to him, his 3rd MACP was due w.e.f. 1.9.2008. Since, the same was not granted to him, he filed Original Application N...

• Original Application No. 256 of 2015. Case: Ram Lakhan Yadav Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  2. The father of the applicant died on 22.1.1975. It is contended that the applicant took birth after death of his father. It is also contended that after attaining the majority, the applicant applied for appointment on compassionate ground on 24.2.2014 i.e. after ten years from attaining the majority. Thereafter, the applicant gave representation

• Original Application No. 217 of 2015. Case: Ram Narayan Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. The applicant has filed this O.A. claiming difference of Gratuity amount to the tune of Rs. 43,448/- per annum as well as arrears of pay amounting to Rs. 42761/- as a result of grant of CPC alongwith interest @ 18% per annum. 2. The applicant has not filed any calculation sheet. It has been contended that the applicant inducted into Railway se...

• OA No. 060/00508/2017. Case: Sh. Jagat Singh son of Late Sh. Kharak Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  2. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that similar matter wherein similar order was challenged before this Tribunal denying the benefit to get the facility of CGHS, came up for consideration before this Court. After exchange of pleadings, it came on record that matter regarding medical facility under CGHS, is pending with the concerned Min...

• O.A. No.060/01097/2016. Case: Harpreet Singh son of Jaswant Singh Vs Union of India and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. The challenge in this Original Application (O.A.), filed by applicant Harpreet Singh son of Sh. Jaswant Singh, is to the impugned order dated 01.08.2016 (Annexure A-1), whereby he was (deemed) suspended on account of detention in criminal case, and order dated 08.11.2016 (Annexure A-3), by virtue of which, his period of suspension was further ex...

Featured documents

• O.A. 681/2009, M.A.441/2009, M.A.442/2009. Case: 1. Constable Suresh Chand; 2. Constable Dalel Singh; 3. Constable Shesh Pal; 4. Constable Sant Singh; 5. Constable Rotash; 6. Constable Ramesh Kumar Vs 1. Union of India, Lt. Governor, Delhi; 2. Commissioner of Police, Delhi; 3. Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi; 4. Dharam Pal Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi; 5. Radhey Shyam, Deputy Commissioner of Police, Delhi. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. Six Constables working in the Delhi Police have joined together to file this application. In addition to the official respondents, they have impleaded two of their colleagues as respondents 4 and 5. They have challenged the promotion given to the above officers to the cadre of Head Constables....

• O.A. No.713/2012, MA No.596/2012. Case: 1. All India Association of Statistical Investigators (SSS) through its General Secretary Ajay Saxena, 2. Gurbax Singh S/o late Shri Waryam Singh, 3. Mitre Lal S/o Shri Sant Lal Verma, 4. Sushil Kohli S/o late Sh. B.S. Kohli Vs 1. Union of India, 2. The Secretary, 3. The Secretary, Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance. Central Administrative Tribunal

  2. The applicants in this OA are members of Subordinate Statistical Service (SSS) constituted in the year 2002. Their prayer is to allow 1st and 2nd financial upgradations under the Assured Career Progression Scheme (ACP) of 1999 in the functional grades only along with all consequential benefits....

• OA No. 3835/2010 with MA No. 1001/2011, OA No. 4168/2010 with MA No. 1266/2011, OA No. 412/2011. Case: 1. Ashok Kumar Jha S/o Late Shrikant Jha, 2. Ajaya Kumar Dhal S/o Late N. K. Dhal, 3. D. S. Naidu S/o D. C. V. Subba Naidu Vs 1. Union of India, Through its Secretary, Ministry of Road Transport and Highways, 2. National Highway Authority of India, Through its Chairman. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of three connected Original Applications bearing OA Nos.3835/2010, 4168/2010 and 412/2011. These matters can be disposed of in view of the consensus arrived at between the parties. We may, however, refer to the background of the case. 2. By a common ...

• Original Application No. 101 of 2009 and Transfer Application No. 112 of 2008. Case: 1. Babu V., S/o. K. Vasudevan Junior Accountant and K.V. Jayakumar, S/o. K. Kunjuraman Junior Accountant, 2. S. Manoharan Junior Accountant Office of CGMT, BSNL and Ors. Vs 1. Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited represented by its Chairman and Managing Director, Assistant Director General (SEA) Bharat Sanchar Nigam Limited, Chief General Manager BSNL and Union of India (UOI) represented by its Secretary Ministry of Communication and Information Technology Department of Telecommunications, 2. Chief General Manager BSNL and Ors.. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. Writ Petition (C) No. 22203/2008 is transferred from the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala to this Tribunal and has been numbered as TA 112/2008. O.A. No. 101/2009 being identical to it, both are heard together and are disposed of by this common order. For the sake of convenience, O.A. No. 101/09 is...

• O.A. No. 589/08 & O.A. No. 591/08. Case: 1. C. K. Ramachandran, Superintendent of Central Excise, 2. V. Sadanandan Nair, Retd. Superintendent of Central Excise, Calicut Commissionerate, Calicut Vs 1. Union of India, represented by its Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, 2. Joint Secretary (Administration), Central Board of Excise & Customs, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, 3. Chief Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Kochi, 4. Commissioner of Central Excise & Customs, Calicut Commissionerate, 5. Secretary to Government of India, Department of Personnel & Training. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. O.A.Nos.589/08 and 591/08 were heard together as the applicants in both the cases were aggrieved by an order denying the benefit of the financial upgradation under the Assured Career Progression Scheme. O.A.No.589/08 2. The applicant joined the service as Stenographer on 21.9.1971 in the...

• RA No. 215 of 2009 and C.P. No. 12 of 2011 in TA No. 1235 of 2009. Case: 1. Delhi Jal Board through its Commissioner, Commissioner of MCD and Lt. Governor of Delhi through its Chief Secretary, 2. Waziruddin S/o Shri Hafiz Nooruddin, Junior Engineer Vs 1. Waziruddin S/o Shri Hafiz Nooruddin, Junior Engineer, 2. Mr. Ramesh Negi, Chief Executive Officer, Delhi Jal Board and Mr. Rakesh Mehta Chief Secretary. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. Both CP No. 12/2011 and RA 215/2009 are in respect of the order dated 10.8.2009 passed by this Tribunal in TA No. 1235/2009 in the matter of Waziruddin v. CEO, Delhi Jal Board and another and therefore, are being disposed of by this common order. 2. The order dated 10.8.2009 in TA 1235/2009 as...

• O. A. No. 289/1997, O.A. No. 420/1997. Case: 1. Ex Head Constable Dev Dutt, 2. Ex Constable Majid Khan Vs 1. Union of India, through Lt. Governor of Delhi, Through Commissioner of Police, Delhi, Police Headquarters, New Delhi, 2. Additional Commissioner of Police (Northern Range), Delhi Police Headquarters, New Delhi, 3. A. K. Patnaik, Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police (Central District), Delhi Police Headquarters, New Delhi, 4. S. B. S. Tyagi, Assistant Commissioner of Police/Karol Bagh, Enquiry Officer, through Dy. Commissioner of Police/HQ(I), New Delhi. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. By this common order, we propose to dispose of two connected Original Applications as common questions of law and facts arise therein. Learned counsel representing the parties also suggest likewise. The applicants Dev Dutt and Majid Khan in the two OAs as referred to above faced a joint...

• OA No.063/00087/2014. Case: 1. Himachal Pradesh Divisional Accounts Officers 2. Deepak Sharma 3. Deepak Anand 4. Shri Vikram Jit 5. Shri Jyoti Lal Vs 1. Union of India 2. Comptroller & Audit General of India 3. Accountant General 4. State of Himachal Pradesh through Principal Secretary 5. Additional Director, Treasury, Accounts & Lotteries. Central Administrative Tribunal

  1. Himachal Pradesh Divisional Accounts Officers / Divisional Accountants Association and four others individual have filed the present Original Application impugning the decision taken by respondent no.4 on 28.04.2014, where they have decided that the Senior Divisional Accounts Officers/...

• O. A. Nos. 665 and 681 of 2010. Case: 1. Jeboy Thomas S/o Late W. T. Thomas, Inspector of Central Excise, Internal Audit Section, Head Quarters Office, Cochin, 2. T. C. Rajakumar S/o M. Raman Nair, Inspector of Central Excise, Internal Audit Section, Headquarters Office, Kochi Vs 1. Union of India, Represented by the Under Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Central Board of Customs and Excise, New Delhi, 2. Commissioner of Central Excise and Customs, Cochin Commissionerate, Cochin. Central Administrative Tribunal

  3. The applicants in the two OAs are Inspectors of Central Excise, initially joined as Upper Division Clerks/Inspectors as the case may be during 1980s. The next functional promotion of the two applicants is to the post of Superintendent of Central Excise. However, when the 1992/1993 batch of...

• O. A. Nos. 150/2008 and 151/2008. Case: 1. K. M. Narendran, Programme Executive, All India Radio, Manjeri; 2. D. Pradeep Kumar, Programme Executive, All India Radio, Calicut Vs 1. Director General, All India Radio, New Delhi; 2. Station Director, All India Radio, Calicut. Central Administrative Tribunal

  3. The applicant in OA No. 150/08 is working as Programme Executive in the All India Radio w.e.f. 26.9.1988 having been recruited directly through UPSC. As there was anomaly in the revision of pay scale consequent on the implementation of the Recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission, he submitted...