Showing posts with label CAT Orders. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CAT Orders. Show all posts
Thursday, July 16, 2015
Wednesday, August 27, 2014
CAT News - Mumbai Cat Judgement on Night Shift Allowance for Industrial Employees
Tuesday, February 19, 2013
Important Judgement on stepping up of Pay:
|
Friday, January 4, 2013
CASUAL LABOURER’S WAGE REVISION CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH GIVES FIRM DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF POSTS
CASUAL LABOURER’S WAGE REVISION
CAT
ERNAKULAM BENCH GIVES FIRM DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF POSTS TO FINALISE THE
CASE WITHIN TWO MONTHS AND REPORT TO THE COURT
Kerala casual, Part-time, Contingent Employees Federation filed the
case in CAT Ernakulam Bench
Next
Case posted on 12.03.2013
CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM
BENCH
TUESDAY
THE 1ST DAY OF JANUARY, 2013
PRESENT
Hon’ble Dr. K. B. S. Rajan
: Judicial
Member
ORIGINAL
APPLICATION NO. 862/2011
Postal Casual, Part-time, Contingent Workers
Union
: Applicants
Represented by General Secy. N. Sreekantan
Versus
Union of India, Represented by Secy. Ministry of
Communication,
: Respndent
Department of Posts, New Delhi & Others
Mr. Muraleedharan for Mr. TC
Govindaswamy
: Counsel for Applicant
Mr. A. D. Raveendra Prasad,
ACGSC
: Counsel for Respondent
ORDER
For redressal of the grievance of
the applicant, a committee was constituted as early as 27 September 2011 and as
such, this has been got adjourned on several occasions. Today, the
counsel for the respondents seeks three months more time as the Committee is to
be reconstituted in view of the retirement of one of the members. It is not
exactly known to the Tribunal as to the stage up to which the committee has
reached. As sufficient time has already expired, it is appropriate
that two months and no more time is granted for the Committee to arrive at a
decision and communicate the same to the applicant. Reply to the OA shall also be filed immediately after
arriving at a decision, so that this can be considered accordingly.
In view of the above, the following
directions are issued.
(a) The
Committee shall decide the issue within two months from today.
(b) Reply
shall be filed within a week thereafter on the basis of the decision of the
committee.
List this case for further
consideration on 12.03.2013.
A copy of this order be made
available to the counsel for the parties.
Sd/-
K.
B. S. Rajan
Judicial
Member
| |
|
Friday, December 28, 2012
CAT ERNAKULUM BENCH JUDGMENT 20.12.2012
CAT ERNAKULUM BENCH JUDGMENT
CENTRAL
ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ERNAKULAM
BENCH
THURSDAY
THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012
PRESENTS
Hon’ble Dr. KBS
Rajan
Judicial Member
AND
Hn,ble Ms. K. George
Joseph Administrative Member
ORIGINAL
APPLICATION NO. 1186/2012
All India Postal Employees Union,
GDS(NFPE): Applicants
R/by its Circle Secy. MS Sabu & Ors.
Versus
The Chief Postmaster General, Kerala
Circle : Respondents
TVM & Ors
Mr. Vishnu S
Chempazhanthiyil : Counsel for applicant
M. Varghese for Mr. Mill Dandapani,
ACGSE : Counsel for Respondents.
ORDER
Admit. Mr. Varghese for Mr. Millu Dandapani,
ACGSC takes notice on behalf of the respondents.
Respondents are directed
to file reply statement with in four weeks time and there after two weeks time
is granted to the applicant to file rejoinder, if any.
List before the
Registrar’s Court for completion of pleadings on 04.02.2013. Registrar to list
the case before the Court after two months including the status relating to
completion of pleadings.
MA 1272/12 for joining together is allowed.
As regards interim
relief, as the Counsel for the applicant submits that in respect of Group D and
Postmen posts, since candidates inducted in these categories from GDS employees
would not be direct recruitees, in so far as Group D and Postmen posts are
concerned, these posts may not be abolished as decided by the respondents.
Accordingly , the respondents shall not take further action in pursuance of the
impugned order at Annexure A-5 dated 19.11.12 in respect of Group D and Postmen
post without the leave of this Court.
Sd/-
Sd/-
Ms. K. George
Joseph
S KBS Rajan
Administrative
Member Judicial Member
Stamp
CAT
CERTIFIED TRUE COPY
Ernakulum
Bench
21.12.2012
Deputy Registrar
|
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
*****
For Latest Updates
Always visit http://satish24k.blogspot.in
Share and Care
|
Saturday, December 22, 2012
ABOLITION OF POSTMEN & GROUP –D POSTS STAYED BY CAT
ABOLITION OF POSTMEN & GROUP –D POSTS STAYED BY CAT
As CAT and High Court of Kerala has given clear judgement that Group-D and Postmen vacancies earmarked for GDS should not be abolished under screening Committee’s 2/3 abolition from 2001 to 2008 (as it is an in service promotion to GDS and NOT Direct Recruitment) the CAT Ernakulam Bench has STAYED the implementation of recent Directorate orders abolishing vacant Postmen & Group-D posts for the period from 2005-2008 in Kerala Circle. Earlier about 413 Group –D Posts marked for abolition was also filled up as per CAT Order. Case filed by NFPE P-4 & GDS=M. Krishnan, SG, NFPE.
|
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
*****
For Latest Updates
Always visit http://satish24k.blogspot.in
Share and Care
|
Friday, November 9, 2012
Let paralysed officer return to work, tribunal tells BSNL
Let paralysed officer return to work, tribunal tells BSNL
CHENNAI: The Central Administrative Tribunal on Monday came to the rescue of a BSNL junior technical officer (JTO) left partially paralysed by a stroke, directing the principal chief engineer of BSNL, Tamil Nadu zone, to allow him to report for duty in his post. The tribunal said the telecom company would have to accept the decision of the medical board and endorse the leave application of the JTO, M Manoharan. The judicial member of the tribunal, G Shanthappa, said Manoharan had established that he should be granted relief and quashed a September 23, 2011 order that refused to allow the petitioner to rejoin as JTO . Manoharan suffered a massive stroke on June 1, 2002 that paralysed his arms and legs. He was not able to speak and was under continuous treatment for two years. The respondents in the case included the executive engineer (civil), the superintending engineer and sub-division engineer (civil) of BSNL in Ambattur. "A competent medical authority examined the applicant and stated that the applicant suffered medical disability during the course of employment. The stand taken by the respondents is rejected," Justice Shanthappa said. Manoharan told the tribunal that he applied for leave after the stroke and returned to duty on January 12, 2004. However, the chief engineer of Chennai Telephones, KK Nagar, the fourth respondent, directed the petitioner to appear before the medical board and obtain its opinion whether his fitness allowed him to perform his duty as JTO. As advised by the board, he proceeded on 'commuter leave' for 90 days from September 13, 2010 and underwent various treatments including physiotherapy. But his seniors did not permit him to rejoin duty. They informed him that the regional medical board of Government General Hospital had on December 10, 2010 declared that he was medically unfit to perform his duties as JTO. "The respondents did not accept the medical report of the applicant and did now allow him to rejoin duty," said the tribunal's administrative member, R Satapathy. "The stand of the respondents is not correct. It is illegal and violates of principles of natural justice." Citing the Supreme Court's 2008 order in Bhagwan Dass vs Punjab Electricity Board, Justice Shanthappa said Manoharan had submitted documents to show that his medical disability had occurred while in service, and this was confirmed by Government General Hospital, so the respondents could not refuse to reinstate him. Source:TOI |
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
*****
For Latest Updates
Always visit http://satish24k.blogspot.in
Share and Care
|
Saturday, November 3, 2012
CAT rejects pension claim of second ‘wife’
Tribunal rejects pension claim of second ‘wife’
CHENNAI : The Madras bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on Wednesday upheld Kolkata-based Ordnance Factory Board’s order rejecting the claim for family pension by the ‘second wife’ of an OFB employee.
The bench of judicial member Justice G Shanthappa and administrative member R Satapathy said the decision taken by the respondents, including OFB, in rejecting the claim of R Devaki, ‘second wife’ of M Subramaniam, for family pension was right.
The department of pension and pensioners’ welfare, the order said, had clarified that the ‘second wife’ would not be entitled to family pension as such a marriage cannot be legally solemnised when either party has a spouse living at the time. The respondents include OFB chairman and director-general and general manager of Cordite Factory in The Nilgiris. “The petitioner (Devika) cannot ask for inclusion of her name for family pension of M Subramaniam, who died on March 6, 2012, since she is his illegitimate wife and not entitled for the relief as prayed for,” said Justice Shanthappa.
An employee of the Cordite Factory, Subramaniam ‘married’ Devika in 1977 when his first wife was alive. When he applied for pension, he claimed only a single pension. However, after his first wife’s death, Subramaniam made a representation on September 10, 2010 requesting the authorities to include Devika in his pension payment order as wife by enclosing the true extract of the HinduMarriage Register kept by the marriage registrar office in Coonoor.
The authorities rejected it saying his ‘second marriage’ happened during the life time of his first wife and such a marriage was invalid. Devika challenged this order before the CAT bench. “Any secondmarriage by a Hindu male after the commencement of 1955 Act during the lifetime of his first wife will be null and have no legal effect. The applicant has not proved her case,” said Justice Shanthappa and dismissed the petition.
Source:Times of India
|
***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** ***** *****
*****
For Latest Updates
Always visit http://satish24k.blogspot.in
Share and Care
|
Thursday, October 25, 2012
GDS - Whether a Servant or an Agent - State Of Assam & Ors vs Shri Kanak Chandra Dutta on 3 October, 1966
State Of Assam & Ors vs Shri Kanak Chandra Dutta on 3 October, 1966
Equivalent citations: 1967 AIR 884, 1967 SCR (1) 679
Bench: Bachawat, R.S.
PETITIONER:
STATE OF ASSAM & ORS.
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
SHRI KANAK CHANDRA DUTTA
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
03/10/1966
BENCH:
BACHAWAT, R.S.
BENCH:
BACHAWAT, R.S.
DAYAL, RAGHUBAR
RAO, K. SUBBA (CJ)
HIDAYATULLAH, M.
SIKRI, S.M.
CITATION:
1967 AIR 884 1967 SCR (1) 679
CITATOR INFO :
RF 1977 SC1677 (3)
D 1979 SC 979 (12)
R 1981 SC 53 (14)
C 1984 SC 161 (27)
ACT:
Constitution of India, 1950, Art. 311(2)-Civil post-Mauzadar in Assam Valley, if holder of civil post entitled to protection of Article.
HEADNOTE:
The respondent, who was a Mauzadar in the Assam Valley, was dismissed from office without complying with the provisions of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution. His writ petition to the High Court was allowed on the ground that he held a civil post under the State of Assam and was entitled to the protection of the Article.
In appeal by the State,
HELD : In the light of the system of recruitment, employment and functions, a Mauzadar is a servant and the holder of a civil post, under the State,, entitled to the protection of the Article.
A civil post means a post not connected with the defence and outside the regular civil services. It is an office or a position to which duties in connection with the affairs of the State are attached. It is under the administrative control of the State but need not necessarily carry "a definite rate of pay" and may involve only part-time employment. A person holding the post is a person serving or employed under the State. The existence of the relationship of master and servant between the State and a person holding a post under it, is indicated by the State's right to select and appoint the holder of the post, its right to suspend and dismiss him., its right to control the manner and method of his doing the work and the payment by it of his wages or remuneration. Such a relationship may be established by -the presence of all or some of these indicia in conjunction with other circumstances, and its existence is a question of fact in each case. [682 G, H; 683 A. B, H] Under the Mauzadari system of collecting revenue, prevailing in the Assam Valley, the revenue charge of a Mauza and the responsibility for the whole revenue of it, in the first instance, rest with the Mauzadar. Originally he may have been a revenue farmer and an independent contractor but under the existing system, he is a subordinate public servant working under the supervision and control of the Deputy Commissioner. He is a Revenue Officer and ex-officio Assistant Settlement Officer exercising delegated powers of Government, and the State has the power and the right to select and appoint him and the power to suspend and dismiss him. Though he may not be a whole-time employee and receives by way of remuneration a commission on his collections and sometimes a salary he holds an office on the revenue side of the administration to which specific and onerous duties in connection with the affairs of the State are attached. [683 E-G]
Observations in Venkata Swamy v. Superintendent of Post Offices A.I.R. 1957 Orissa 112, that a part-time employee cannot be the holder of a civil post disapproved.
JUDGMENT:
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 254 of 1964 .
6SupC.I./66-15
680
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated August 13, 1963 of the Assam and Nagaland High Court in Civil Rule No. 387 of 1962.
S. V. Gupte, Solicitor-General and Naunit Lal, for the appellant.
K. R. Chaudhuri, for the respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Bachawat, J. This appeal raises the question whether a Mau- zadar in the Assam Valley holds a civil post under the State of Assam, and is entitled to the protection of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution. On March 4, 1939, respondent, Kanak Chandra Dutta, was appointed Mauzadar of Mancotta Monza in the Dibrugarh Sub-division of Lakhimpur District. His father also before his death was the Mauzadar of Mancotta Monza for about 52 years from 1885 to 1938. Under the orders of the Deputy Commissioner, Lakhimpur, the respondent was suspended on August 22, 1949 and was dismissed from the office of the Mauzadar on July 4, 1962. It is common case that this dismissal from office was made without complying with the provisions of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution. On a writ petition filed by the respondent, the Assam High Court quashed the order of dismissal. The High Court held that the respondent held a civil post under the State of Assam, and was entitled to the protection of Art. 311(2) of the Constitution. The correctness of this finding is challenged by the State of Assam in this appeal by special leave.
Under the Mauzadari system of collecting revenue prevailing in the Assam Valley, the revenue charge of a Monza and the responsibility for the whole revenue of it in the first instance rest with the Mauzadar. The Mauzadar is spoken of as a "revenue contractor", see Baden-Powell's Land Systems of British India, Vol. 3, p. 459. A brief description of the Mauzadari system is given at pp. 56 and 57 of the Introduction to the Assam Land Revenue Manual, 6th Edn. The executive instructions appearing in paragraphs 115 to 159 and 167(a) at pp. 203 to 215 and 217 to 222 give the method of selection, appointment and dismissal of a Mauzadar, the duties and emoluments of the office and the registers to be kept and maintained by him. The Mauzadar is generally an influential and well-to-do resident of his Monza. lie may be appointed and dismissed by the Deputy Commissioner subject to the Commissioner's approval and suspended by the Deputy Commissioner on his own authority. A Mauzadar's successor is ordinarily selected from amongst the members of his family. If a suitable heir of the deceased Mauzadar is a minor, the post may be kept open for him for a period not exceeding three years, an agent being appointed in the meantime to carry on the duties of the Mauzadar. Every Mauzadar before his appointment has to execute a written 681
agreement (kabuliyat) in the prescribed form. He is also required to furnish security to the satisfaction of the Deputy Commissioner.
A Mauzadar is a public servant whose primary duty is to collect land revenue and other Government dues with the collection of which he is entrusted. He is responsible for the collection of poll-tax, house-tax, tauzi-bahir revenue, grazing fees and forest dues. He undertakes to pay into the treasury the full amount of all instalments of land revenue and local rates included in the Jamabandi and of house-tax, poll-tax and grazing fees within one month of the date on which they fall due for payment. In regard to land revenue, his duties are confined to collection and he is not concerned with its assessment, the settlement of land and the checking of maps or assessment papers. He is charged with the special duties of supervising the performance of duties by Gaonburas, to receive applications for waste lands which he is authorised to entertain and to submit them with a report to the proper revenue authority, to submit reports of cases sent to him by special order for local enquiry, to assist the district authorities in the assessment of income-tax, to report, when so directed, upon the sufficiency of the security offered by the lessees of Government or Local Board ferries, fisheries etc., to submit weekly reports upon the condition of crops, the prevalence of epidemics amongst men or cattle, the loss of life caused by wild animals and the appearance of insect pests, to compile and submit to the Civil Surgeon a monthly return of vital statistics, to check the Gaonburas' reports of births and deaths by local inspection, to effect field mutations and field partitions in uncontested cases, to assist Government in any work connected with the village organi- sation system, to warn persons not to allow their cattle to stray on or damage the roads, to report offenders and encroachments on roadside lands and to submit weekly returns of collections. Generally, a Mauzadar is required to act as the Deputy Commissioner's assistant in all administrative matters within his Mouza so far as he may be called upon to do so.
In order to deal properly with mutation and other work, the Mauzadar has free access to the settlement papers in the hands of mandals, and it is the duty of the mandals to attend upon him, when required, during such investigations as are conducted by him. The Mauzadar is required to keep and maintain a number of official registers, and minute details of keeping the accounts and the registers are prescribed. The criminal prosecution of a Mauzadar requires the Commissioner's sanction. In exceptional cases, the Deputy Commissioner may impose upon him an executive fine of an amount not exceeding Rs. 200/-.
682
The Mauzadar is permitted to address his correspondence with Government offices "service bearing", and is given a small annual allowance for the provision of stationery. I* is responsible for the payment of process fee on all processes issued at his instance. His remuneration as Mauzadar is generally by a commission on the revenue, local rates and grazing dues collected by him, but he may also be paid a fixed salary.
The Mauzadar may be invested with the power of attachment and sale of movables under s. 69 of the Assam Land and Revenue Regulation 1886 (Regulation No. I of 1886). Mauzadars are appointed Revenue Officers under s. 124 of the Regulation. All Mauzadars in the Assam Valley and in the case of Mauzadars who are minors, their Sarbarahkars have been appointed ex-officio Assistant Settlement Officers and invested with the powers to effect registration under s. 53(A) in uncontested cases and to dispose of under Chap. VI of the Regulation all applications for partition of revenue- paying estates in which no objection is preferred. See footnotes to ss. 124, 133 and 137 of the Regulation at pp. 41, 44 and 45 of the Manual.
A Mauzadar may own a tea garden and other landed property and engage in trade or politics, but if any of his extraneous occupations interferes seriously. with his primary duties as a Mauzadar, the Deputy Commissioner is required to consider whether he should be retained in his office.
The question is whether a Mauzadar is a person holding a civil post under the State within Art.311 of the Constitution. There is no formal definition of "post" and "civil post". The sense in which they are used in the Services Chapter of Part XIV of the Constitution is indicated by their context and setting. A civil post is distinguished in Art. 310 from a post connected with defence; it is a post on the civil as distinguished from the defence side of the administration, an employment in a civil capacity under the Union or a State.See marginal notet of Art.311. In Art.311,a member of a civil service of the Union or an all-India service or a civil service of a State is mentioned separately, and a civil post means a post not connected with defence outside the regular civil services. A post is a service or employment. A person holding a post under a State is a person serving or employed under the State. See the marginal notes- to Arts. 309, 310 and 311. The heading and the subheading of Part XIV and Chapter I emphasise the element of service. There is a relationship of master and servant between the State and a person holding a post under it. The existence of this relationship is indicated by the State's right to select and appoint the holder of the post, its right to suspend and dismiss him, its right to control the manner and method of his doing the work and the payment by it of his wages or remuneration. A relationship of master and servant
683
may be established by the presence of all or some of these indicia, in conjunction with other circumstances and it is a question of fact in each case whether there is such a relation between the State and the alleged holder of a post. In the context of Arts. 309, 310 and 311, a post denotes an office. A person who holds a civil post under a State holds "office" during the pleasure of the Governor of the State, except as expressly provided by the Constitution. See Art.
310. A post under the State is an office or a position to which duties in connection with the affairs of the State are attached, an office or a position to which a person is appointed and which may exist apart from and independently of the holder of the post. Article 310(2) contemplates that a post may be abolished-and a person holding a post may be required to vacate the post, and it emphasises the idea of a post existing apart from the holder of the post. A post may be created before the appointment or simultaneously with it. A post is an employment, but every employment is not a post. A casual labourer is not the holder of a post. A post under the State means a post under the . administrative control of the State. The State may create or abolish the post and may regulate the conditions of service of persons appointed to the post.
Judged in this light, a Mauzadar in the Assam Valley is the holder of a civil post under the State. The State has the power and the right to select and appoint a Mauzadar and the power to suspend and dismiss him. He is a subordinate public servant working under the supervision and control of the Deputy Commissioner. He receives by way of remuneration a commission on his collections and sometimes a salary. There is a relationship of master and servant between the State and him. He holds an office on the revenue side of the administration to which specific and onerous duties in connection with the affairs of the State are attached, an office which falls vacant on the death or removal of the incumbent and which is filled up by successive appointments. He is a responsible officer exercising delegated powers of Government. Mauzadars in the Assam Valley are appointed Revenue Officers and ex-officio Assistant Settlement Officers. Originally, a Mauzadar may have been a revenue farmer and an independent contractor. But having regard to the existing system of his recruitment, employment and functions, he is a servant and a holder of a civil post under the State.
Counsel for the State stressed the fact that normally a Mauzadar does not draw a salary. But a post outside the regularly constituted services need not necessarily carry "a definite rate of pay." The post of a Mauzadar carries with it a remuneration by way of a commission on collections of Government dues. Counsel stressed the fact that a Mauzadar is not a whole-time employee. But a post 684
outside the regularly constituted services may be a part- time employment. The conditions of service of a Mauzadar enable him to engage in other activities. In Venkata Swamy v. Superintendent of Post Offices(l), the Orissa High Court held, on a consideration of the relevant conditions of employment, that a temporary extra- departmental branch post-master was not a person holding a civil post, but the observation in that case that a part- time employee cannot be the holder of a civil post outside the regularly constituted services is too wide and cannot be supported. In Sher Singh v. State of Rajasthan(2), the Rajasthan High Court held that a chaudhari appointed under the Land Revenue Act of Bikaner is not entitled to the protection of Art. 311. The report of the case does not disclose the functions of the chaudhari and the regulations governing his employment. In Bindu Nath v. State of Assan(3), the Court found that the applicant was never appointed to the post of a Mauzadar, and no question of the protection of Art. 311 could arise in the circumstances. The appeal is dismissed with costs.
V.P.S.
Appeal dismissed.
(1) A.I.R. 1957 Orissa, 112.
(2) I.L.R. [1956] 6 Rai. 335, 339-340.
(3) A.I.R. 1959 Assam. II S.
685
|
| For Latest Updates Always Visit http://satish24k.blogspot.com/ |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)