Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras

P Chidambaram vs M/O Railways on 29 November, 2023

                                1             OA No.310/00401/2016



            CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
                     CHENNAI BENCH

                       OA/310/00401/2016

Dated Wednesday the 29th day of November Two Thousand Twenty Three

                           CORAM :

     HON'BLE MS. LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, Member (J)
                          &
   HON'BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, Member (A)

P.Chidambaram, S/o.M.Periyasamy,
Grade - I/Teacher/Commerce,
Railway Higher Secretary School,
Palghat, Kerala State.
Res.address.
122/3, Sivakami Complex,
V.O.C.Street, Poonmalaipatti,
Tiruchy - 620 004.            ...                       Applicant

By Advocate Mr.G.Palani

Vs

1. Union of India rep by
The Chief Personnel Officer,
Southern Railway,
Park Town,
Chennai -3.

2.The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer,
Palghat Division,
Southern Railway,
Palghat-678 002
Kerala State.
                              2         OA No.310/00401/2016

3. Mr.T.Velmurugan,
Grade - II/Teacher/History,
Railway Higher Secondary School,
Palghat, Southern Railway,
Palghat-678 002
Kerala State.

4.Mr.K. Lataswamy.
Teacher/Grade - II, Hindi,
Railway Mixed Higher Secondary School,
English Medium,
Perambur, Chennai.                ... Respondents

By Advocate Mr.R.S.Krishnaswamy
                                        3                 OA No.310/00401/2016




                               ORAL ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Ms. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Member(J)) When the matter is taken up for hearing, there is no representation for the applicant. Even on the previous occasion also i.e. on 20.11.2023 neither the counsel for the applicant nor the applicant is present and hence the matter is posted under the caption "For Dismissal" today. It is evident that the applicant is not interested in prosecuting the matter.

2. In view of the above, OA is dismissed for default. No order as to costs.




 (Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi)                        (Lata Baswaraj Patne)
     Member (A)                                          Member (J)
                         29.11.2023
AS