Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A)
Ajit Singh – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. facts of transfer, conviction, dismissal, and unauthorized quarter retention. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. applicant's contentions against retrospective damages. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. respondents justify damages per allotment rules. (Para 4) |
| 4. license fee deduction negates unauthorized claim from transfer. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. post-dismissal retention limited to one month; clean hands required. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. quash retrospective damages; recalculate from post-retention period. (Para 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20) |
ORDER
1.By filing the instant Original Application, under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking the following prayer(s): -
“(a) to set aside the order dated 29/6/18 vide F. No. DPADI/2018/ 1901/19/D/7/2007 issued by Suptd. of Police (HO) CBI New Delhi wherein the said accommodation allotted to the applicant has been cancelled retrospectively.
(b) to cancel demand of Rs 26,22,420/- by CBI from applicant on account of damage charges vide letter dated 04/9/2018(6/9/20 18).
(c) to direct the respondent no. 1 to consider the case of the applicant sympathetically and levy the charges from the date of intimation for vacating the
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
