Latest news with #CentralAdministrativeTribunal
The Hindu
12 hours ago
- General
- The Hindu
CAT sets aside deputation of B. Ashok as Self-government Reforms Commission chairperson
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Ernakulam Bench, has set aside the Kerala government order appointing B. Ashok, Principal Secretary, Agriculture department, and Agricultural Production Commissioner as chairperson of the Local Self-government Reforms Commission on deputation. The Bench passed the order on a petition filed by Mr. Ashok challenging the appointment. The IAS officer contended that his deputation as the commission chairperson was without his consent and in violation of various statutory rules and guidelines. He pointed out that the State government was not empowered to issue an order deputing him as the commission chairperson under Rule 6(2)(i) of the All India Service (Cadre) Rules 1954. The tribunal observed that the power of deputation of an IAS officer under rule 6(2)(i) can be exercised only by the Union government with the consent of the applicant. Since the power was purportedly exercised under rule 6(2)(i) by the State government, the government order is legally not sustainable. Besides, the government order was not in accordance with Rule 12(1) of the Indian Administrative Service (Pay) Rules.
Indian Express
25-05-2025
- Politics
- Indian Express
2019 phone tapping case: Karnataka govt proposes fresh inquiry against IPS officer Alok Kumar, CAT stays notice
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has stayed a notice issued by the Karnataka chief secretary to senior Indian Police Service (IPS) officer Alok Kumar, Additional Director General of Police, which proposed a departmental inquiry concerning the 2019 phone tapping case. Kumar argued that the inquiry had already been dropped, as revealed in a Right to Information (RTI) response dated May 6, 2024. He further pointed out that the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) had filed a 'B' (closure) report, concluding that there was no evidence linking him to the alleged audio leak. The CBI had questioned him about the alleged illegal phone tapping of politicians and officials, which occurred during the tenure of Janata Dal (Secular) chief minister H D Kumaraswamy. Kumar alleged that the May 9, 2025, notice, under Rule 8(4) of the All India Services (Discipline & Appeals) Rules, 1969, was issued with questionable timing—just days after the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) had cleared his name for elevation to the post of director general and inspector general of police (DG and IGP). He noted that the DGP had forwarded his profile to the Union Public Service Commission (UPSC) on April 23 for consideration. Kumar's legal counsel told the tribunal that a prior departmental inquiry on the same matter was concluded, and no action was taken. He also referred to the February 13, 2024, order by the additional chief metropolitan magistrate (ACMM), Bengaluru, which accepted the CBI's closure report in the case. He argued that the fresh notice was issued with malafide intent to obstruct his promotion due on May 21. CAT Judicial Member B K Srivastava said the case should be heard by a division bench, which is currently unavailable. He passed an interim order staying the May 9 notice until the next hearing on June 10. The tribunal also issued notices to all respondents, including the chief secretary, and said the division bench may consider interim relief on the next hearing date.
New Indian Express
25-05-2025
- Politics
- New Indian Express
CAT stays inquiry notice against IPS officer Alok Kumar in 2019 audio leak case before DG promotion review
BENGALURU: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has stayed a notice issued by the chief secretary to senior IPS officer Alok Kumar, who is the additional director general of police, proposing a departmental inquiry against him into the 2019 telephone audio leak case. Kumar contended that the departmental inquiry was already dropped as per the reply dated May 6, 2024, given by the state government under the Right to Information Act, and the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) too has also filed a 'B' (closure) report in the case which conclusively established that there was no evidence against him into the alleged audio leak. He alleged that the notice, dated May 9, 2025, was issued under Rule 8(4) of All India Services (Discipline & Appeals) Rules, 1969, just days before his name was cleared by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotion to the director general of police post. The notice was after the director general and inspector general of police took his profile on April 23, 2025 to forward it to the Union Public Service Commission to consider him for the post of DG&IGP, he said.
New Indian Express
17-05-2025
- Health
- New Indian Express
Contract nurses seek Delhi L-G help for regularisation
NEW DELHI: Despite clear directions from the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), the Delhi government has yet to frame a policy for the regularisation of contractual nurses and paramedical staff working against sanctioned posts in various health facilities. With many of them nearing retirement age and staring at the loss of service benefits, the affected employees have now knocked on the doors of the Lieutenant Governor, seeking his urgent intervention to expedite the process. In a letter to the L-G, the Delhi State Contractual Employees Association urged the administration to address their long-pending demand with empathy and seriousness. They highlighted that the CAT, in its order dated March 12, 2025, had directed the Delhi government to re-examine its regularisation policy for nursing and paramedical staff. This directive came after the Tribunal scrutinised the Office Memorandum issued on October 11, 2020, which had only offered age relaxation to contractual staff, while still requiring them to compete in open recruitment for regular posts. The Association reminded the L-G that the Tribunal had asked the government to reconsider the matter in light of the Supreme Court's judgment in Jaggo vs. Union of India delivered in December 2024. The Tribunal had emphasised that the exercise should be completed in a time-bound manner, preferably within six months. The employees pointed out that despite serving over two decades in Delhi's public health system and being appointed against sanctioned posts through proper recruitment procedures, they continue to remain on contract. 'In view of the foregoing facts and circumstances, it is respectfully requested that appropriate directions be issued to the Health & Family Welfare Department to comply with the order dated 12.03.2025 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. The department may be directed to frame a comprehensive policy for the regularization of contractual Nursing and Paramedical employees of the Government of NCT of Delhi, in accordance with the principles laid down by the Supreme Court,' the letter read. 'It is also earnestly requested that status quo be maintained, and no contractual Nursing or Paramedical employee be disengaged or removed until a new regularization policy is duly framed and implemented,' it added.
Hindustan Times
13-05-2025
- Politics
- Hindustan Times
HC seeks Centre's response on the issue of cases falling under CAT, Allahabad being taken up in Delhi
Prayagraj, Taking serious note of the principal bench at Delhi hearing cases falling within the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal at Allahabad, the Allahabad High Court has sought the Centre's response in the matter. Justice Ajit Kumar, in his order, observed that the chairman of principal bench of CAT, New Delhi has misinterpreted the provisions relating to case transfer power given to him under Section 25 of Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 for entertaining directly fresh petitions, which otherwise fall within the territorial jurisdiction of CAT, Allahabad bench. The chairman is doing so only on the ground that districts falling in western Uttar Pradesh are closer to New Delhi, the judge observed. Hearing a writ petition filed by Rajesh Pratap Singh, the court directed the central government and other respondents to file their reply in this case within four weeks and fixed July 17 for the next hearing. Passing the above directives, the court observed, "Since the petitions have been entertained by the principal bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Delhi it has resulted in action of lawyers to abstain from work at Allahabad, as they complain that all the petitions are being entertained directly by Principal Bench at New Delhi only on the ground that districts falling in the western Uttar Pradesh are closer to New Delhi and this is how this petition has been directly preferred before this court". "The orders that have been passed by the chairman of the tribunal placed before this court raise a legal issue whether the chairman sitting at the principal bench of the tribunal could have entertained a fresh matter directly to decide the same merely on the ground of distance qua place of residence of a party. "If that be so, then every such case that may fall in terms of distance closer to Delhi would lie before the Principal Bench at New Delhi completely denuding the exercise of power by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench in terms of its territorial jurisdiction or any other bench in the country for that matter. "This in my considered view, must not have been the object in incorporating the provision like Section 25 of the Act, 1985, while providing for different Benches in the courts like the one at Allahabad having territorial jurisdiction in matters of the entire western Uttar Pradesh, including Uttarakhand", the court added. This is something like acquiring territorial jurisdiction by merely exercising power under section 25 of the Act, 1985, on a regular basis, which the legislature did not provide for, while assigning territorial jurisdiction to the Central Administrative Tribunal Bench at Allahabad, the court said. This is neither the idea nor the intendment while providing a power under Section 25 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, the court added.
