Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Suresh Kumar Batra, Judicial Member, Rashmi Saxena Sahni, Administrative Member
Jaswant Singh – Appellant
Versus
Chandigarh Administration – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's service history and acp claims timeline (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. applicant's arguments against delayed acp (Para 4) |
| 3. respondents' defense on exam precondition and extension (Para 5) |
| 4. no departmental exam required for acp financial upgradation (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. no acp benefits during post-superannuation extension (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. 1st acp granted, 2nd acp rejected; oa partially allowed (Para 15 , 16) |
ORDER
Per: SURESH KUMAR BATRA MEMBER (J):-
1. The applicant has filed the present Original Application, along with M.A. No. 1928/2017 seeking condonation of delay, under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act 1985 seeking the following reliefs:-
(i) That the office order dated 05.07.2016 (Annexure A-1) be quashed and set-aside, in the interest of justice, to the extent benefit of 1 ACP has been granted w.e.f. 24.01.2014 in place of w.e.f. 10.10.2009.
(ii) That the respondents be directed to grant applicant the benefit of 1st ACP w.e.f. 10.10.2009 on completion of 4 years of service and 2nd ACP w.e.f. 10.10.2014 on completion of 9 years of service in the cadre of SDE.
(iii) That the applicant be held entitled to all consequential benefits/relie
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
