Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Om Prakash VII, Judicial Member, Mohan Pyare, Administrative Member
Manish Kumar Shukla – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant seeks quashing of termination for erroneous age relaxation. (Para 2 , 3) |
| 2. respondents claim contract employee ineligible for age relaxation. (Para 4 , 6) |
| 3. applicant asserts valid relaxation under staff rules for all employees. (Para 5 , 7) |
| 4. precedents distinguish erroneous appointments from valid relaxations. (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. inquiry flawed; applicant internal candidate with competent relaxation. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. terminate quashed; reinstate with further inquiry option. (Para 18 , 19) |
ORDER
By Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (Administrative):
Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri K.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
2. By means of this OA, the applicant has sought the following reliefs :
“(i) To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 30.1.2015 passed by Resp. no. 2. (Annexure-1).
(ii) To issue a further writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the applicant as Office Assistant Grade-III and continue to pay his salary and other consequential benefits, as if the order dt. 30.1.2015
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
