Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
M.G. Sewlikar, Member (J), Shri Krishna, Member (A)
Ratnadip Saoji Ramteke – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicants' service history and 2005 panel promotion delay. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 12) |
| 2. parties argue limitation, in rem vs personam status. (Para 5 , 6 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. fcs requires advance promotions without vacancy wait. (Para 13 , 14) |
| 4. tribunal judgment is in rem for scheme-wide application. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. no delay; oa allowed with antedated promotion. (Para 17 , 18) |
ORAL ORDER
Per : HON’BLE JUSTICE M.G. SEWLIKAR, MEMBER (J)
By this OA the applicants are claiming antedated promotion that is from the year 2005. They are also seeking quashing of the order dated 13th August, 2013.
2. Facts in briefs are that applicant No.1 was appointed as Research officer on 01st December, 1982. He was promoted as Senior Research Officer on 01st January, 1988. Subsequently he was promoted to the post of Chief Research Officer on 04th April, 1996. He came to be promoted to the post of Joint Director on 23rd September, 2009.
3. The applicant No.2 was appointed as Research Officer on 24th November, 1980. He came to be promoted as Senior Research Officer on 11th January, 1986. Subsequently he was promoted to the post of Chief Research Officer on 7th December, 1998.
4. The applicant No.3 wa
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
