Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Shri Krishna, Member (A), Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
Sanjay G. Gurav – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's service history and medical absence explanation (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. respondents justify deemed resignation under rule 12(2) (Para 3) |
| 3. applicant's arguments on misconduct and natural justice (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 4. respondents defend rule 12(2) procedure sufficiency (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 5. rule 12(2) requires opportunity to explain absence (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. impugned orders non-speaking, require reconsideration (Para 17 , 18 , 19) |
| 7. quash orders; rule 12(2) valid without enquiry (Para 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
ORDER
Per : Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
The present Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 by challenging the order dated 07.03.2018 (Annexure A-1) passed by the respondent No.3 under Rule 12(2) of the Central Civil Services (Leave) Rules, 1972 treating the applicant as deemed to have resigned from the Government service with effect from 19.03.2011 and holding the applicant not entitled for retirement benefits. The applicant is also challenging the order dated 15.10.2018 (Annexure A-2) passed by the Higher Authority rejecting the representation of the applicant against the said o
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
