Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LATA BASWARAJ PATNE, Member (J), VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, Member (A)
PENUGONDA RAVITEJA – Appellant
Versus
UOI – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. details of multiple consolidated oas listed (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. applicants challenge rejection for railway level-1 posts (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. applicants claim eligibility despite delayed ncvt exam (Para 5 , 15) |
| 4. respondents enforce strict 12.04.2019 ncvt cut-off (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. tribunal hears arguments on eligibility criteria (Para 14 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 6. notification mandates ncvt appearance by cut-off date (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23) |
| 7. applicants misrepresented facts in applications (Para 24 , 25 , 26 , 27) |
| 8. precedents uphold strict eligibility enforcement (Para 28 , 29) |
| 9. oas dismissed; no relaxation of cut-off allowed (Para 30 , 31) |
COMMON ORDER
(per Hon'ble Dr. Lata Baswaraj Patne, Member(J))
Since the issue involved in all these OAs is similar, all the OAs were heard together and a common order is being passed. However, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the facts and the pleadings mentioned in OA No. 672/2023 are referred to hereunder:
2. The relief sought in OA No. 672 of 2023 is as follows:
“It is humbly prayed that the Hon’ble Tribunal may be pleased to:-
(1) Quash and set aside the Impugned Order dt. 01.11.2023 of Respondent No.1 as it
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
