Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 447 (1.05 seconds)

Sudhanshu Kumar Tiwari vs General Manager D.L.W., Varanasi on 11 February, 2021

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the enquiry proceedings, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, which shall be made available to them by their ld. Counsel..
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Santosh Prakash Shukla vs M/O Railways on 11 February, 2021

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the enquiry proceedings, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, which shall be made available to them by their ld. Counsel..
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Amresh Kumar vs General Manager D.L.W., Varanasi on 11 February, 2021

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the enquiry proceedings, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, which shall be made available to them by their ld. Counsel..
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Madan Kumar vs M/O Railways on 11 February, 2021

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the enquiry proceedings, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, which shall be made available to them by their ld. Counsel..
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Kamlesh Kr Singh vs M/O Railways on 11 February, 2021

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the enquiry proceedings, in accordance with law, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of 8 months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, which shall be made available to them by their ld. Counsel..
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ramesh Kr Srivastava vs M/O Railways on 14 December, 2020

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the proceedings, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ramesh Kr Srivastava vs M/O Railways on 14 December, 2017

In view of the above discussion, the present O.A. is disposed off in the same terms as in OA No. 330/407/2017 - Amar Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors, with a direction to the respondents authority to proceed with the disciplinary enquiry after supplying copy of Disagreement Note to the applicant to enable him to submit his defence in a time bound manner and to conclude the proceedings, as expeditiously as possible, in accordance with law.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Amar Singh vs Union Of India on 18 December, 2023

In this case, the Apex Court was considering those cases wherein the Page 3 of 5 CATLucknow Bench OA No. 332/00170/2020 Amar Singh Vs U.O.I. &Ors private respondents were beneficiaries of a mistake committed by the employer, and on account of the said unintentional mistake, employees were in receipt of monetary benefits, beyond their due. Another essential feature in those cases was that the employees were as innocent as their employers, in the wrongful determination of their inflated emoluments - that is - they had not furnished any incorrect information which led to the mistake of making the higher payment, they had not made any misrepresentation, nor they had committed any fraud. The issue for adjudication was whether all the private respondents (employees), against whom an order of recovery (of the excess amount) has been made, should be exempted in law, from the reimbursement of the same to the employer. The issue was settled by the Apex Court in the following manner:
Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next