Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
9Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
ftp case - cat judgement - chennai

ftp case - cat judgement - chennai

Ratings: (0)|Views: 4,855|Likes:

More info:

Published by: K V Sridharan General Secretary P3 NFPE on Jan 16, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

02/01/2013

pdf

text

original

FTP CASE \u2013 CAT JUDGEMENT
Copy of CAT Chennai Judgement dated 24-03-2004 on OA No. 440 of
2003
FINAL ORDER

Central Administrative Tribunal: Madras Bench
Wednesday, the 24th day of March 2004 (24-3-2004)
Present

The Hon\u2019ble Shri. S. Manickavasagam, Member (A)a nd
The Hon\u2019ble Shri. G. Shanthappa, Member (J)
OA No. 440 of 2003
1.D. Ba bul a l
2. The All India Postal Emp. Union Gr. \u2018C\u2019 Tamil Nadu Circle

..\u2026Applicants
Vs.
1. UOI rep. by the Director General

Department of Posts, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi
2. The Chief Postmaster General
Tamil Nadu Circle, Anna Salai, Chennai \u2013 2
\u2026..Respondents
Mr. K.M. Ramesh\u2026\u2026\u2026. Advocate for the applicant
Mr. S. Muthuswamy\u2026..Advocate for the respondents
Order: Pronounced by the Hon\u2019ble Shri.Manickavasagam, Member (A)
1. We have heard both sides and perused the records.

2. As mentioned earlier, A-1 got his HSG.II only on 17-2-2003. For getting the promotion to the next higher grade, viz. HSG.I he is required to put in three years of service in that grade. Thus this applicant becomes eligible for promotion to the next higher grade, viz. HSG.I only after 17-2-2006. Under these circumstances we do not think that he is justified in approaching this Tribunal at this stage seeking promotion to HSG.I or challenging the new RRs at this point of time. That apart, when he is not even eligible for consideration of promotion we are of the considered view that the applicant can hardly challenge the RRs. Therefore in far as A-1 is concerned, there is no case.

3. Applicant No. 2 (A-2 for short) has come before this Tribunal representing that he belongs to the Postal Employees Union and therefore he may be permitted to join as A-2 applicant association. It is stated that the A-2 has joined along with other in this OA in order to protect the interests of the other Gr. C employees who are similarly placed like the A-1.

4. We gave our careful consideration to this aspect of the matter even
though MA was initially allowed at the time of admission of this OA.
5.It may be noted that the RRs came into force by a notification

dated 24-1-2002. Thereafter, the respondents have announced the departmental examination only in 2003. As of now, the full impact of the RRs is not yet known. We further of the considered

view that the Union as of now can hardly interfere in a generalised manner in matter relating to promotions, where the eligibility criteria stipulated the number of years as one of the basic qualifications.

Activity (9)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 hundred reads
1 thousand reads
Prakash Iyer liked this
Achyutanand Dhar liked this
rowson123 liked this
sspowar_rms liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->