Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.28 seconds)
Documents citing Balvinder Singh vs Union Of India Through on 26 March, 2010

Ghanshyam Jha S/O B. K. Jha vs Union Of India on 18 October, 2011

13. We are accordingly of the view that the ACR of applicant for the year 2002-03 is not complete and hence can not be considered for promotion to the next higher rank. This judgment has since been confirmed by the Honble High Court of Delhi vide order dated 1.4.2009 passed in WP(C) No.7964/2009. We took the same view in OA No.253/2009 in the matter of Balvinder Singh v Union of India, decided on 26.3.2010.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Mrs. Swati S. Patil vs Union Of India on 11 February, 2011

The Applicant, an officer of the Indian Revenue Service (1974 batch) and presently working as Commissioner of Income Tax, is seeking direction to the Respondents not to consider her Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for the year 2003-04 for promotion, in which she has been given 'Good' grading, which is below the prescribed benchmark of 'Very Good' for promotion. The aforesaid ACR has been communicated to the Applicant by communications dated 12.05.2010 of the first Respondent, Department of Revenue, Government of India for making representation against the below benchmark grading in that ACR. The contention of the Applicant is that the aforesaid ACR has not been reviewed by the reviewing authority and has not been accepted also by the accepting authority and that it has been written only at one level of the reporting authority. The learned counsel for the Applicant contended that the matter was squarely covered by the judgement of this Tribunal in OA number 24/2007, Ashok Kumar Aneja V. Union of India and others, decided on 20.11.2008 and OA number 253/2009, Balvinder Singh V. Union of India and others, decided on 26.03.2010.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 3 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1