Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Veena Kothavale, Judicial Member, Sisir Kumar Ratho, Administrative Member
C. Kathirvel – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicant's claim for compassionate appointment post-father's death. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. rejection based on 1992 railway policy barring second wife's children. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. applicant's arguments: legal heir status, supreme court precedent. (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. respondents' defense: policy priority to first wife, no vested right. (Para 12 , 13) |
| 5. 1992 circular quashed; section 16 hma legitimizes second marriage children. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. no competing claims from first family; belated objections mala fide. (Para 19 , 20) |
| 7. impugned order quashed; reconsider claim per supreme court ruling. (Para 21 , 22) |
(Hon'ble Ms. Veena Kothavale, Member(J)
Applicant has filed this OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal nd Act, 1985 seeking to set aside the order dated 11.01.2023 passed by the 2 nd respondent and consequently direct the 2 respondent to appoint the applicant in any suitable post in the respondents office within the time stipulated by this Hon'ble Tribunal.
2. The case of the applicant is that his father, T. Chelladurai initially joined Railway department on 21.06.1986 and worked as a Fitter Helper in Southern Railway Office at
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
