Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
S.C. Srivastava vs Union Of India Through The General ... on 25 September, 2008
OPEN COURT Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad. Allahabad This The 25th Day Of September 2008. ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 215 OF 2008 Present: Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, Member (J) S.C. Srivastava S/o Shri Narmda Prasad Srivastava, R/o 54/23/12 Rama Nand Nagar, Allahpur, Allahabad. ..........Applicant By Advocate: Shri R.B. Tripathi Shri B. Metha Versus. 1. Union of India through the General Manager, North Central Railway, Allahabad. 2. The Divisional Railway Manager (Karmik) North Central Railway, Allahabad. 3. The Senior Divisional Electric Engineer (G) North Central Railway, Allahabad. 4. The Divisional Karmik Officer, North Central Railway, Allahabad. ..........................Respondents. By Advocate: Shri P.N. Rai. O R D E R
I have heard the parties counsel.
2. I find no justification for non-granting officiating allowances if the applicant has already discharged from the duties of higher post as argued by learned counsel for the applicant. I see no difficulty in not granting the officiating allowance. In view of this, I hereby direct the applicant to make a fresh representation within 10 days from the date of receipt of copy of this order, if such representation is received, the competent authority shall consider and decide the same by a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order and if found the claim of the applicant genuine, pay him officiating allowance in accordance with the rules.
3. With the above direction, the OA stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
(A.K. Gaur) Member (J) RKM/ OPEN COURT Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad.
Allahabad This The 25th Day Of September 2008.
Diary NO. 898 OF 2008 Present:
Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, Member (J) Mohan Lal son of Sri Bachhi Lal, Resident of Karvi, District Chitrakut Presently posted as Trolleyman under Section Engineer, (Rail Path) Chitrakut Dham, Karvi, District- Chitrakut.
..........Applicant By Advocate: Shri A. Chaturvedi Shri R. Tripathi.
Versus.
1. Union of India through the General Manager, North Central Railway, Allahabad.
2. The Divisional Rail Manager, North Central Railway Jhasni Division, District-Jhansi.
3. Assistant Regional Engineer, Central Railway Chitrakut Dham, Karvi, District Chitrakut.
4. Achhey Lal son of Ramdas, Gangaman-35, Chitrakut Dham, Karvi, District Chitrakut.
..........................Respondents.
By Advocate: Shri P.N. Rai Shri G. Chaudhary O R D E R Having heard the parties counsel, I am firmly of the view that the order passed by respondent No.3 transferring the services of the applicant from the post of Trolleyman to the post of Gangman has been passed in Administrative exigencies. Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that he has not done the work on the post of Gangman. I do not find any merit in this submission and there is no illegality in the order. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed. No order as to costs.
(A.K. Gaur) (Member (J) RKM/ Dy No.898/08 25.9.2008 Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, J.M. Shri R. Tripathi, counsel for the applicant is present. Shri P.N. Rai and Shri G. Chaudhary are also present for the respondents.
Delay condonation application No.1915/08 is allowed.
It is pointed out by the learned counsel for the respondents that the OA deserves to be dismissed on the ground non-joinder of necessary parties. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that this mistake may be corrected and he may be permitted to implead the Union of India through General Manager, N.C.R, Allahabad and Divisional Rail Manager, North Central Railway, Jhansi Division, District-Jhansi instead of respondent No.1 & 2.
Learned counsel for the applicant is permitted to delete the respondent No.1 and 2 as necessary parties as indicated above. This will be done within the course of the day.
Order dictated separately.
(A.K. Gaur) Member (J) RKM/ OPEN COURT Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad.
Allahabad This The 25th Day Of September 2008.
Original Application NO. 373 OF 2008 Present:
Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, Member (J) Anees Ahmad S/o Hameed Ullah, R/o Mohalla-Purani Tehsil, P.O. Khalilabad, District- Sant Kabir Nagar.
..........Applicant By Advocate: Shri S.K. Srivastava Versus.
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication and I.T., Department of Posts, New Delhi.
2. Post Master General, Gorakhpur Circle, Gorakhpur.
3. Superintendent of Post Offices, Basti/Sant Kabir Nagar, District- Basti.
4. Post Master, H.P.O. Khalilabad, District - Sant Kabir Nagar.
..........................Respondents.
By Advocate: Shri S.C. Mishra O R D E R Having heard Shri S.K. Srivastava, counsel for the applicant and Shri S.C. Mishra, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. I am firmly of the view that this OA is time barred and deserves to be dismissed on the ground of delay and latches. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that he had filed several representations to the respondents but the respondents did not pay any heed to the same. It is settled Pinciple of Law that series of representation will not extend the benefit of limitation.
3. In my considered view that there is considerable delay. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court 2000 SCC (L&S) 53 - R.C. Sharma Vs. Udham Singh Kamal, the OA is dismissed on the ground of delay and latches. No order as to costs.
(A.K. Gaur) Member (J) RKM/ OPEN COURT Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad.
Allahabad This The 25th Day Of September 2008.
Original Application NO. 392 OF 2007 Present:
Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, Member (J) Smt. Mukha Devi W/o Late Sri Lalita Ram Resident of Village and Okha Post Ranopur Saka Deeha Bazar, District Chandauli.
..........Applicant By Advocate: Shri Rajjan Lal Versus.
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Communication, Department of Post and Dak Bhawan Sansad Marg, New Delhi.
2. Chief Post Master General, U.P. Ricle Hazarat Ganj, Lucknow.
3. The Senior Superintendent of Post Offices, Eastern Division Varanasi.
..........................Respondents.
By Advocate: Shri R.K. Srivastava O R D E R I Have heard Shri Rajjan Lal, counsel for the applicant and Shri R.K. Srivastava, counsel for the respondents.
2. The husband of the applicant died on 30.4.2001 during the service period. On 2.7.2001, the applicant had submitted an application for appointment on compassionate ground. The case of the applicant was also recommended by Senior Post Master for appointment on compassionate ground. On 12.4.2005, the Committee was constituted for considering the case of the applicant for appointment on compassionate ground. Having considered the case of the applicant for compassionate appointment, the Circle Relaxation Committee in its meeting held on 10, 11, and 12.3.2005 and under the provision of DOP&T letter dated 26.9.1995 and various other letters and instructions issued from time to time on the subject, the competent authority did not find the case of the applicant for recommending for appointment. The Circle Relaxation Committee taking into account the inter-se-seniority of all the cases in terms of assets and liabilities and indigence of the families and various other factors did not find proper to recommend his case, and his request for appointment on compassionate ground was not acceded to.
3. I have carefully seen the order passed by the Competent Authority and having heard the parties counsel at length. I do not find any merits in this OA. Accordingly, the OA is dismissed at the admission stage itself. No order as to costs.
(A.K. Gaur) Member (J) RKM/ OPEN COURT Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad.
Allahabad This The 25th Day Of September 2008.
Original Application NO. 1335 OF 2006 Present:
Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, Member (J)
1. Ramesh Chandra, aged about 46 years, S/o Shri Durga Prasad R/o Village Chham Tehsil Kalpi District Jalaun.
2. Ram Shanker, aged about 43 years, S/o Shri Thakur Das, R/o Village & Post/Mohalla-Hariganj, Tehsil Kalpi District Jalaun.
..........Applicant By Advocate: Shri R. Verma Versus.
1. Union of India through General Manager, North Central Railway, Nawab Yusuf Road, Allahabad.
2. The Divisional Railway Manager (P), North Central Railway, Jhansi Division, Jhansi.
3. The Permanent Way Inspector (PWI), North Central Railway, Orai. ..........................Respondents.
By Advocate: Mrs. Anita Srivastava.
O R D E R Heard Shri D. Tiwari holding brief of Shri R. Verma, counsel for the applicant and Mrs. Anita Srivastava, counsel for the respondents.
2. A perusal of the record clearly indicates that this OA is ordinarily time barred and no reasonable plausible explanation has been offered by the applicant for condonation of delay in filing the OA. In view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court reported in 2000 SCC (L&S) 53 - R.C. Sharma Vs. Udham Singh Kamal, the OA is not maintainable and it is accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and latches. No order as to costs.
(A.K. Gaur) Member (J) RKM/ OPEN COURT Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench Allahabad.
Allahabad This The 25th Day Of September 2008.
Original Application NO. 281 OF 2007 Present:
Hon'ble Mr. A.K. Gaur, Member (J) Babu Lal S/o Ghan Shyam Das, R/o 36, Thakuryana Pulia No.9, District Jhansi.
..........Applicant By Advocate: Shri S. M. Ali.
Versus.
1. Union of India through General Manager, North Central Railway, Allahabad.
2. Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway, Jhansi.
..........................Respondents.
By Advocate: Shri A.K. Pandey.
O R D E R Learned counsel for the applicant states that the name of the applicant is already mentioned in the Casual Labour Live Register. The learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant is fulfilling the eligibility criteria of absorption as per instructions given by the Railway Board but respondents are ignoring the applicant's case without any reasons and his counterparts/various similarly circumstanced persons have been regularized by the same respondents, the case of the applicant deserves to be considered in terms of the judgment rendered by this Tribunal in OA No.163 of 2004 (Jugal Kishore and 13 ors. Vs. U.O.I.) decided on 15.2.2005 as well as OA No.273 of 2002 (Nem Singh Vs. U.O.I.) decided on 1.2004. Learned counsel for the applicant states that these cases are similar and identical to the present case.
2. I see no difficulty in directing the respondents to consider and decide the case of the applicant in light of the aforesaid two judgments rendered by the Tribunal in OA No.273/02 and 163/04.
3. Accordingly, I hereby direct the competent authority to consider and decide the representation dated 22.1.2008 (Annexure-A-8) in the light of the aforesaid two judgments rendered by the Tribunal within a period of three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.
4. With the above direction, the OA stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
(A.K. Gaur) Member (J) RKM/ 1