LIST OF ALL ACTS IN INDIA

Additional Duties of Excise (Goods of Special Importance) Act, 1957
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
Advocates Act, 1961
Agricultural Refinance & Dev. Corpn.Act, 1963
Air (Prev. and Control of Pollution) Act,1981
Apprentices Act, 1961, 1962,
Arbitration & Conciliation Act, 1996
Arbitration Act, 1940 alongwith Arbitration (Protocol and Convention) Act, 1937;
Architects Act, 1972 with Council of Archi. Rules, 1973

Banking, Public Financial Institutions & Negotiable Instruments Laws (Amend.)Act, 1988
Banking Regulation Act, 1949
Beedi Workers Welfare Cess Act, 1976
Beedi Workers Welfare Fund Act, 1976
Beedi and Cigar Workers (Conditions of Employment) Act, 1966
Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act,1988
Boilers Act, 1923
Bombay Labour Welfare Fund Act, 1953
Bonded Labour System (Abolition) Act,1976
Building & Other Construction Workers’ Welfare Cess Act, 1996 Child Labour (Prohibition & Regul.) Act,1986
Building & Other Construction Workers’(Regulation of Employment &Conditions of Service) Act, 1996
Bureau of Indian Standards Act, 1986

Visit http://sapost.blogspot.in/ for latest News

Cable Television Networks (Regul.) Act,1995
Carriage by Air Act, 1972
Carriers Act, 1865
Central Agricultural University Act, 1992
Central Apprent. Council Rules, 1961
Central Excise Tariff Act, 1985
Central Excises Act, 1944
Central Motor Vehicles Rules, 1989
Central Sales Tax Act, 1956
Chit Funds Act, 1982
Christian Marriage Act, 1872
Cine Workers and Cinema Theatre Workers (Regulation of Employment)Act, 1981
Cinematograph Act, 1952
Citizenship Act, 1955, 1956
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Commission of Sati (Prevention) Act, 1987
Commissions of Inquiry Act, 1952
Companies Act, 1956
Company Secretaries Act, 1980
Competition Act, 2002
Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Contempt of Court Act, 1971
Contract Act, 1872
Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970
Copyright Act, 1957
Court Fees Act, 1870
Customs Act, 1962
Dangerous Machines (Regul.) Act, 1983
Delhi Apartment Ownership Act, 1986
Delhi C.P. Rules, 1987
Delhi Co-operative Societies Act, 1972
Delhi Development Act, 1957
Delhi Fire Prevention and Fire Safety Act, 1986
Delhi Juvenile Justice Rules, 1987
Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, 1957
Delhi Police Act, 1978
Delhi Rent Act, 1995
Delhi Sales Tax Act, 1991
Deposit Insurance & Credit Guarantee Corpn. Act, 1961
Depositories Act, 1996
Designs Act, 2000
Dissolution of Muslim Marriages Act,1939
Divorce Act, 1869
Dock Workers (Safety, Health & Welfare)Act, 1986
Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961
Drugs (Prices Control) Order, 1995
Drugs and Cosmetics Act, 1940
Easements Act, 1882
Electricity Act, 2003
Electricity Rules, 1956
Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948
Emigration Act, 2003
Employees Pension Scheme, 1995
Employees’ Provident Funds & Miscellaneous Provisions Act, 1952
Employees State Insurance Act, 1948
Employment Exchanges (Compulsory Noti.of Vacancies) Act, 1959
Employment of Children Act, 1938
Environment (Protection) Act, 1986
Equal Remuneration Act, 1976
Essential Commodities Act, 1955
Essential Commodities Act, 1955
Evidence Act, 1872
Expenditure Tax Act, 1987
Export-Import Bank of India Act, 1981

Visit http://sapost.blogspot.in/ for latest News
Factories Act, 1948
Family Courts Act, 1984
Fertiliser (Control) Order, 1985
Fixation of Rates Act, 1958
Foreign Awards (Recognition and Enforcement) Act, 1961 and Arbitration and Conciliation Act, 1996
Foreign Contribution (Regulation) Act,1976
Foreign Exchange Management Act, 1999
Foreign Exchange Regul. Act, 1973
Foreign Marriage Act, 1969
Foreign Trade (Development & Regul.)Act, 1992
Freedom of Information Act, 2002
General Clauses Act, 1897
Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Act, 1999
Government Grants Act, 1895
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991
Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1992
Guardians and Wards Act, 1890
Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act,1956
Hindu Marriage Act, 1955
Hindu Minority & Guardianship Act, 1956
Hindu Succession Act, 1956
Hire Purchase Act, 1972
Hotel Receipts Tax Act, 1980
Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act, 1956
Income Tax Act, 1961
Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986
Industrial Development Bank of India Act, 1964
Industrial Disputes Act, 1947
Industrial Employment (Standing Orders)Act, 1946
Industrial Finance Corporation Act,1948
Industries (Development & Regul.) Act,1951
Infant Milk Substitutes, Feeding Bottles and Infant Foods (Regulation of Production, Supply & Distribution)Act, 1992
Information Technology Act, 2000
Insecticides Act, 1968
Insurance Act, 1938
Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority Act, 1999
Insurance Rules, 1939
Inter-State Migrant Workmen Regulation of Employment and Conditions of Service Act, 1979
Interest on Delayed Payments to Small Scale & Ancillary Industrial Undertakings Act, 1993
Intermediate Education Act, 1921

Visit http://sapost.blogspot.in/ for latest News
Jute Packing Materials (Compulsory use in Packing Commodities) Act, 1987
Juvenile Justice Act, 1986
Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2000
Juvenile Justice (Delhi) Rules, 1987
Labour Laws (Exemption from furnishing Returns & Maintaining Registers by certain Establishments) Act, 1988
Land Acquisition Act, 1894
Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987
Life Insurance Corporation Act, 1956
Limitation Act, 1963
Lotteries (Regulation) Act, 1998
Maternity Benefit Act, 1961
Maternity Benefits (Mines and Circus)Rules 1963
Medical Profession under Consumer Protection Act, 1986
Medical Termination of Pregnancy Act,1971,
Medicinal and Toilet Preparations (Excise Duties) Act, 1975
Mental Health Act, 1987
Milk and Milk Product Order, 1992
Mines Act, 1952
Minimum Wages Act, 1948
Monopolies & Restrictive Trade Practices Act, 1969
Motor Transport Workers Act, 1961
Motor Vehicles Act, 1988
Multimodal Transportation of Goods Act, 1993
Muslim Women (Prot. of Rights on Div.)Act, 1986
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985
National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development Act, 1981
National Highway Authority of India Act,1988
National Housing Bank Act, 1987
National Human Rights Commission (Procedure) Regulation Provincial Insolvency Act, 1920
National Security Act, 1980
National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Austim, Cerebral, Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999
Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881
Notaries Act, 1952
Official Secrets Act, 1923

Visit http://sapost.blogspot.in/ for latest News
Parsi Marriage and Divorce Act, 1936
Partnership Act, 1932
Passports Act, 1967, 1980
Patents Act, 1970
Payment of Bonus Act, 1965
Payment of Gratuity Act, 1972
Payment of Wages Act, 1936
Personal Injuries (Emergency Provisions)Act, 1962
Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights & Full Participation) Act, 1995
Pharmacy Act, 1948
Plantations Labour Act, 1951
Post Office Act, 1898
Prasar Bharti (Broadcasting Corporation of India) Act, 1990
Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection)Act, 1994
Press and Registration of Books Act, 1867
Prevention of Blackmarketing & Maintenance of Supplies of Essential Commodities Act, 1980
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988
Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954
Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988
Prevention of Money-Laundering Act, 2002
Prevention of Terrorism Act, 2002
Prisoners (Attendance in Courts) Act, 1955 Prize Chits and Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978
Probation of Offenders Act, 1958
Protection of Civil Rights Act, 1955
Protection of Human Rights Act, 1993 with
Provident Funds Act, 1925
Public Liability Insurance Act, 1991
Public Premises (Eviction of Unauthorised Occupants) Act, 1991, 1971
Railway Claims Tribunal Act, 1987
Railway Property (Unlawful Possession)Act, 1966
Railway Protection Force Act, 1957
Railways Act, 1989
Recovery of Debts due to Banks & Financial Institutions Act, 1993
Regional Rural Banks Act, 1976
Registration Act, 1908
Representation of the People Act, 1950
Representation of the People Act, 1951
Reserve Bank of India Act, 1934

Visit http://sapost.blogspot.in/ for latest News
Sale of Goods Act, 1930
Sales Promotion Employees (Conditions of Service) Act, 1976
Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act 1989
Securities & Exchange Board of India Act,1992
Sick Industrial Companies (Special Provisions) Act, 1985
Small Industries Development Bank of India Act, 1989
Special Courts Act, 1979
Special Marriage Act, 1954
Special Provisions Act
Specific Relief Act, 1963
Spices Board Act, 1986
Spices Cess Act, 1986
Stamp Act, 1899
Standards of Weights and Measures Act,1976
State Financial Corporations Act, 1951
Succession Act, 1925
Supreme Court Rules, 1966
Telecom Regulatory Authority of India Act, 1997
Telegraph Act, 1885
Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987
Trade Marks Act, 1999
Trade Unions Act, 1926
Trade and Merchandise Marks Act, 1958
Transfer of Property Act, 1882
Transplantation of Human Organs Act,1994
Trusts Act, 1882

Visit http://sapost.blogspot.in/ for latest News
Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967
Urban Land (Ceiling and Regulation) Act,1976
Wakf Act, 1995
Weekly Holidays Act, 1942
Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972
Working Journalists and other Newspaper Employees (Conditions of Service) & Misc. Provisions Act, 1955
Workmens’ Compensation Act, 1923

Courty : http://akulapraveen.blogspot.in/

THE FUDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN INDIA

FOLLOWING ARE THE FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS IN INDIA
Right to Equality

Article 14 :- Equality before law and equal protection of law
Article 15 :- Prohibition of discrimination on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.
Article 16 :- Equality of opportunity in matters of public employment
Article 17 :- End of untouchability
Article 18 :- Abolition of titles, Military and academic distinctions are, however, exempted Right to Freedom
Article 19 :- It guarantees the citizens of India the following six

fundamentals freedoms:

Freedom of Speech and Expression
Freedom of Assembly
Freedom of form Associations
Freedom of Movement
Freedom of Residence and Settlement
Freedom of Profession, Occupation, Trade and Business

Article 20 :- Protection in respect of conviction for offences
Article 21 :- Protection of life and personal liberty
Article 22 :- Protection against arrest and detention in certain cases Right Against Exploitation
Article 23 :- Traffic in human beings prohibited
Article 24 :- No child below the age of 14 can be employed Right to freedom of Religion
Article 25 :- Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion
Article 26 :- Freedom to manage religious affairs
Article 27 :- Prohibits taxes on religious grounds
Article 28 :- Freedom as to attendance at religious ceremonies in certain educational institutions Cultural and Educational Rights
Article 29 :- Protection of interests of minorities
Article 30 :- Right of minorities to establish and administer educational institutions
Article 31 :- Omitted by the 44th Amendment Act Right to Constitutional Remedies
Article 32 :- The right to move the Supreme Court in case of their violation (called Soul and heart of the Constitution by BR Ambedkar)

Extension of Jurisdiction of CAT

Extension of Jurisdiction of CAT : To view please Click Here.

A FULL TIME CASUAL LABOURER WITH TEMPORARY STATUS OF Group'D' (GOVT. EMPLOYEE) COULD GET PENSION

A favourable judgement from CAT-Bangalore Bench in OA No.932/2012
































//copy//


View / Download

Employees can't claim VRS benefit as matter of right: Supreme Court

NEW DELHI: No employee, as a matter of right, can seek the benefits of voluntary retirement scheme (VRS) and the decision-taking power lies only with the employer firm, the Supreme Court has held.

"A voluntary retirement scheme introduced by a company, does not entitle an employee as a matter of right to the benefits of the scheme," a bench headed by Chief JusticeAltamas Kabir said.

The bench, also comprising Anil R Dave andRanjana P Desai, said it was "well settled" that only the employer can decide VRS pleas of its employees.

"Whether an employee should be allowed to retire in terms of the scheme (VRS) is a decision which can only be taken by the employer company, except in cases where the scheme itself provides for retirement to take effect when the notice period comes to an end," it said.

The observation came in a verdict by which the apex court rejected the plea of C V Francis, a Kerala resident, that his termination from the post of a manager of Steel Authority of India Ltd (SAIL) at Bokaro in Jharkhand on account of unauthorised absence in 1999 was illegal as he had already applied for the VRS.

"We are not...inclined to interfere with the orders impugned in the Special Leave Petition which is, accordingly, dismissed," the bench said.

Francis, who had taken up an employment in the USA after applying for the VRS, had contended that his plea for VRS came into effect on the expiry of the period of notice as the employer did not take any decision on his plea and hence, it should be construed as deemed acceptance.

Besides seeking VRS, Francis had left to the US after taking leave, but his subsequent leave applications were not accepted.

SAIL termed his subsequent absence as unauthorised and later, initiated disciplinary proceedings leading to his termination from the service.

The single and division bench of the Jharkhand High Court had rejected the plea of Francis on the issue.

Source : http://economictimes.indiatimes.com

Promotion cannot be withheld because of the mere pendency of investigation: CAT Order

Promotion cannot be withheld because of the mere pendency of investigation, rules CAT: The Hindu

The Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench, has ruled that promotion cannot be withheld because of the mere pendency of investigation and directed the Defence Ministry to promote an Indian Ordnance Factories Service (IOFS) officer within 45 days.

Disposing of an application filed by M. Ravi, a 1975 batch officer, the Bench, comprising members B. Venkateswara Rao and Naresh Gupta, held that the defence authorities had erred in withholding his promotion without valid reason. The Bench also said, “No charge sheet has been issued to the applicant. The promotion was withheld merely on the ground of pendency of criminal investigation by the CBI.”

Mr. Ravi is presently working as Senior Deputy Director of General, Armoured Vehicles Factory, Avadi.

He contended that he served in various capacities in other factories. The Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) convened in January 2012 and 2013 recommended his name along with S.K. Gupta and B.N. Singh for promotion to Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) for its final approval.

He was not promoted on the ground of a criminal investigation by CBI pending against him. The investigation was a result of an alleged irregularity that took place when he was working at ordnance factory, Medak, between 1999 and 2005.

In an application before CAT, he also sought a direction to the defence authorities to promote him. He also contended that the promotion had been withheld because of ‘long pending’ investigation but there was no disciplinary action of any kind initiated against him. Hence, Mr. Ravi said that the authorities postponed the promotion indefinitely.

The defence authorities contended that six vacancies arose in the level of member to the Ordnance Factory Board.

In fact, the recommendation of DPC should be approved by Appointments Committee of the Cabinet (ACC) for effecting promotion. Along with others, the candidature of Mr. Ravi was also considered. In view of the investigation by the CBI with respect to him, the ACC accorded its approval to others and directed the Defence Ministry to resubmit the proposal for promotion of Mr. Ravi after completion of the ongoing investigation.

The Tribunal also pointed out that a draft charge sheet which did not fructify into regular charge sheet and that should not be a ground for withholding promotion. The Tribunal added, “Unless a regular charge sheet is issued, no disciplinary action can be initiated against the officer of the government and no promotion can be withheld by the mere pendency of investigation.”

Read more at: http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/tamil-nadu/promotion-cannot-be-withheld-because-of-the-mere-pendency-of-investigation-rules-cat/article4843716.ece

via : http://karnmk.blogspot.in/

CAT Cuttack Bench directs the Principal Chief PMG Odisha Circle to keep the selection process to the post of Postmaster Grade-III, abeyance

Stay granted by CAT (P.B) DELHI against abolition of Posts of POSTMEN & MTS

Department of Posts ordered abolition of 17093 posts of various cadres. Out of which about 7500 posts were related to Postmen & MTS. AIPE Union Postmen & MSE/Gr. ‘D’ filed a case No. 1736/21.05.13 in CAT (P.B) Delhi along with NUPE Postmen & MTS and AIPEU GDS (NFPE). The Hon’ble CAT Delhi has granted stay against the abolition of posts of Postmen & MTS.

Next date of hearing is fixed as 11.6.2013.

CAT Order: Regarding stepping up of pay only not the pay scale at par with junior

All India Postal Accounts Employees & other vs Union of India & others orders on 1st February, 2013 regarding 

grant of stepping up pay of all Senior Accountants on par with Senior Accountants who are junior to the former in the cadre of Sr. Accountant

Introductory first two paras of Order:

The applicants have sought the following relief:-

(a) Direction from this Hon ble Tribunal to Respondents for grant of stepping up pay of all Senior Accountants on par with Senior Accountants who are junior to the former in the cadre of Sr.Accountant. (b) Direction to the Respondents to pay compound interest on the arrears, compounded every months, as the respondents caused serious prejudice to the Applicants every months when the Applicants were not granted the financial upgradations by stepping up their pay. (c) Direction from Hon ble Tribunal to declare the CLAUSE 8 of the condition for grant of BENEFIT UNDER THE ACP SCHEME being uptra vires beyond the statute which provide The financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme shall be purely personal to the employee and shall have no relevance to his seniority position. As such, there, shall be no additional financial upgradation for the senior employee on the ground that the junior employee in the grade has got higher pay scale under the ACP Scheme. (d) Direction to the respondents to pay cost of litigationto the Applicants as the Applicants have been dragged to the Tribunal by the respondents.

(e) Any other order as this Hon ble Tribunal may deem fit under the present facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Briefly undisputed facts of the case are that the applicants joined the Department of Posts as LDCs and were promoted as Junior Accountant. Subsequently, on restructuring of the Accounts Cadre, 80% of the Accountants were designated as Senior Accountants and were placed in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600 (revised Pay Scale Rs.5500-9000) w.e.f. 01.04.1987. Government of India promulgated an Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme for Central Government Civilian Employees vide their O.M. No. 35034/1/97-Estt(D) dated 09.08.1999 which provided for two financial upgradations to employees who had completed 12 and 24 years of service but had not found regular promotion in their department. Financial upgradation under the Scheme was to be given to the next higher grade in accordance with the existing hierarchy in a cadre. Clause-8 of the Scheme by which the applicants are aggrieved reads as follows:- The financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme shall be purely personal to the employee and shall have no relevance to hisseniority position. As such, there shall be no additional financial upgradation for the senior employee on the ground that the junior employee in the grade has got higher pay-scale under the ACP Scheme.

Conclusion para of Order (Order given by Hon'ble CAT):

9. In our opinion, the case of the applicants is covered by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, hence they are also entitled to the same benefits. Accordingly, the present O.A. is allowed. Respondents are directed that the pay of the applicants be stepped up in terms of Para-9 of the aforesaid judgment. This shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs.

See full details of Court Case:

Principal Bench, New Delhi.
OA-2124/2011
MA-1617/2011
Reserved on : 28.01.2013.
Pronounced on : 01.02.2013.

Hon ble Mr. G. George Paracken, Member (J)
Hon ble Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)

1. All India Postal Accounts Employees
Association represented by S. Santosh Kumar,
President, R/o 13-B, DDA Flats, Type-IV,
New Mahavir Nagar, New Delhi-18.
2. E. Kanagraj, Senior Accountant
in O/o General Manager, Postal Accounts &
Finance, Tamilnadu Circle, Chennai-8. . Applicants
(through Sh. B.K. Berera, Advocate)

Versus

1. Union of India through
The Secretary,
Department of Posts (Postal & Accounts Wing)
Ministry of Communication & Information
Technology, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg,
New Delhi-1.

2. The Secretary,
Department of Personnel & Training,
Ministry of Public Grievances & Pensions,
North Block, New Delhi-1. . Respondents
(through Sh. S.M. Zulfiqar Alam, Advocate)

O R D E R

Mr. Shekhar Agarwal, Member (A)

The applicants have sought the following relief:-

(a) Direction from this Hon ble Tribunal to Respondents for grant of stepping up pay of all Senior Accountants on par with Senior Accountants who are junior to the former in the cadre of Sr.Accountant. (b) Direction to the Respondents to pay compound interest on the arrears, compounded every months, as the respondents caused serious prejudice to the Applicants every months when the Applicants were not granted the financial upgradations by stepping up their pay. (c) Direction from Hon ble Tribunal to declare the CLAUSE 8 of the condition for grant of BENEFIT UNDER THE ACP SCHEME being uptra vires beyond the statute which provide The financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme shall be purely personal to the employee and shall have no relevance to his seniority position. As such, there, shall be no additional financial upgradation for the senior employee on the ground that the junior employee in the grade has got higher pay scale under the ACP Scheme. (d) Direction to the respondents to pay cost of litigationto the Applicants as the Applicants have been dragged to the Tribunal by the respondents.

(e) Any other order as this Hon ble Tribunal may deem fit under the present facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Briefly undisputed facts of the case are that the applicants joined the Department of Posts as LDCs and were promoted as Junior Accountant. Subsequently, on restructuring of the Accounts Cadre, 80% of the Accountants were designated as Senior Accountants and were placed in the pay scale of Rs.1400-2600 (revised Pay Scale Rs.5500-9000) w.e.f. 01.04.1987. Government of India promulgated an Assured Career Progression (ACP) Scheme for Central Government Civilian Employees vide their O.M. No. 35034/1/97-Estt(D) dated 09.08.1999 which provided for two financial upgradations to employees who had completed 12 and 24 years of service but had not found regular promotion in their department. Financial upgradation under the Scheme was to be given to the next higher grade in accordance with the existing hierarchy in a cadre. Clause-8 of the Scheme by which the applicants are aggrieved reads as follows:- The financial upgradation under the ACP Scheme shall be purely personal to the employee and shall have no relevance to hisseniority position. As such, there shall be no additional financial upgradation for the senior employee on the ground that the junior employee in the grade has got higher pay-scale under the ACP Scheme.

3. The grievance of the applicants is that they have been denied benefits under this Scheme on the grounds that they had joined as LDC and had already found two promotions in their cadre, namely, to the post of Junior Accountant and then as Senior Accountant whereas those who had joined the department as direct recruits to the post of Junior Accountant and had found only one promotion to the level of Senior Accountant were given benefit of the ACP Scheme and placed in higher grade. The applicants have contended that due to denial of benefit of ACP Scheme to them many of the direct recruits who are junior to them in the cadre have started drawing more salary than their seniors. The applicants have further stated that all Senior Accountants regardless of the fact whether they are promotees or direct recruits are placed in a single gradation list and their seniority is determined on the basis of their date of appointment as Senior Accountants. The applicants had represented before the respondents but their representations had been rejected. Aggrieved by this, they have approached this Tribunal. Their main prayer is that Clause-8 of the ACP Scheme be declared ultra vires beyond the statute and their pay be stepped up to bring it at par with their juniors.

4. The respondents have in their reply stated that the ACP Scheme was enforced to deal with the problem of stagnation in certain cadres. It provides for at least two financial upgradations in service career of an employee even if he is not able to find regular promotions due to unavailability of vacancies. According to them Clause-8 of the Scheme clearly states that the financial upgradation under the Scheme is purely personal to the employee and shall have no relevance to his seniority position and as such no additional financial upgradation will be given to a senior employee on the ground that the junior employee has got higher pay scale under the ACP Scheme. The respondents argued that there is no infirmity in the Clause-8 of the Scheme placing reliance on the decisions of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of UOI and Anr. Vs. V.R. Swaminathan, JT 1997(8) SC 61 and State of U.P. & Ors. Vs. J.P. Chaurasia and Ors., JT 1988 (4) SC 53.

5. We have heard the learned counsel for both sides and perused the material placed on record.

6. During the course of arguments, the respondents made available judgment of Bombay Bench at Nagpur of CAT in OA-2117/2005 (A.N. Pant & Ors. Vs. UOI & Ors.) dated 01.08.2012 between the same parties. By the aforesaid judgment, the claim of the applicants for placement in higher pay scale on the ground that junior employee had got that grade on account of ACP Scheme was rejected. However, learned counsel for the applicants pointed out that the prayer of the applicants in the instant case was different. According to him, in the case decided by the Bombay Bench at Nagpur, the prayer of the applicants was for grant of higher pay scale whereas in the instant case the prayer is only for stepping up of pay.

7. We have seen the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court on which reliance has been placed by the respondents and we find that the facts and circumstances of the two cases are different. Thus, in the case of V.R. Swaminathan (supra) senior employees were demanding stepping up of pay on account of the fact that juniors had got the benefit of higher pay because they had officiated on higher post based on local/circle seniority. Further, in the other case of J.P. Chaurasia (supra) two scales had been created in the cadre of Bench Secretaries of Allahabad High Court that promotions from lower to higher scale taking place based on seniority-cum-fitness. None of these two cases appears to be relevant.

8. On the other hand, the applicants have placed reliance on the judgment of Chandigarh Bench of this Tribunal dated 19.01.2010 in OA-156-JK-2009(Ashok Kumar Vs. UOI & Ors.). Relevant porition of this judgments reads as under:-

9. The issue raised in this case as to whether a senior person, though having received two promotions, is entitled to stepping up of his pay at par with his junior, who has been granted benefit under ACP Scheme and by virtue of this, is receiving higher pay than his senior, stands clinched by various decisions of this Tribunal including in O.A. No. 842-JK-2007 decided on 17.11.2009 titled Madan Gopal Sharma & Others Vs. Union of India & Others. In that case reliance was placed on decisions of Apex Court in the case of Ram Sarup Ganda (supra) and (Gurmail Singh). Reliance was also placed on decision in the case of Harcharan Singh Sudan (supra). It was held that seniors are entitled to step up their pay as a general rule as and when any junior gets fixed in a pay scale higher to them on account of grant of ACP Scale. Para 14 of the decision in the case of Harcharan Singh Sudan (supra) in Para 14 is reproduced as under:- 14. However, one aspect is to be seen. In the case decided by the Apex Court, the State Government was the appellant and the challenge was against the High Court judgment, which held that the higher pay scale be given to the respondents at par with their juniors whose pay scale became higher on account of the benefit of ACP afforded to them. The appeal was not dismissed but partly allowed and it was declared that the respondents were entitled to stepping up of pay. In other words, there shall only be the stepping up of pay and not the pay scale. The pay scale in respect of the applicants would remain the same as of date but the pay would be fixed in appropriate stage, and if there is no stage to match the pay drawn by the junior, the difference shall be treated as one of personal pay. The pay parity would be compared annually and partly would be maintained in future

10. Finding that the facts of this case are covered by the decision in the case of Harcharan Singh Sudan s case as well as Madan Gopal Sharma and Others (supra), this Original Application is allowed to the extent that annexure A-2 relating to rejection of claim of applicant is quashed and set aside.

11. With this O.A. stands disposed of and the respondents are directed to step up the pay of the applicant at par with his junior aforesaid and in terms of the directions contained in the case of Harcharan Singh Sudan (supra). It is made clear that the applicant shall be given stepping up of pay only and not the pay scale, as explained above. The pay may be fixed accordingly and arrears be also paid to him within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. However, in the given facts and circumstances of the case, applicant is not entitled to interest. Parties to bear their own costs.

9. In our opinion, the case of the applicants is covered by the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, hence they are also entitled to the same benefits. Accordingly, the present O.A. is allowed. Respondents are directed that the pay of the applicants be stepped up in terms of Para-9 of the aforesaid judgment. This shall be done within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. There shall be no order as to costs. 

(Shekhar Agarwal) (G. George Paracken)

Member (A) Member (J)

Source: http://indiankanoon.in/doc/119664509/

Courtesy : http://karnmk.blogspot.in/

THE CRIMINAL LAW (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE, 2013

THE CRIMINAL LAW (AMENDMENT) ORDINANCE, 2013

Promulgated by the President in the Sixty-fourth Year of the Republic of India. 

 

An Ordinance further to amend the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872. 

 

WHEREAS a Bill further to amend the Indian Penal Code, the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 was introduced in the House of the People and referred to the Department related Parliamentary Standing Committee on Home Affairs for examination and report which is pending; 

 

AND WHEREAS Parliament is not in session and the President is satisfied that circumstances exist which render it necessary for him to take immediate action to give effect to the provisions of the said Bill with certain modifications; 

 

NOW, THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred by clause (1) of article 123 of the Constitution, the President is pleased to promulgate the following Ordinance:––

Read more details : http://pib.nic.in/newsite/erelease.aspx?relid=91979

VERY IMPORTANT JUDGEMENT

Some years back a Com. Samal was punished by the Cuttack Administration on flimsy ground for his union activities. The Charge-sheet was challenged in the CAT. Hon'ble CAT, Odisha has now set aside the Charge-sheet. This is very important judgment, which up-held the principle that one cannot be the complainant, witness and judge in his own case. 

CLICK HERE FOR THE COPY

CAT ERNAKULAM BENCH- GR.D / POSTMEN POSTS SHOULD NOT BE ABOLISHED

CAT ERNAKULUM BENCH JUDGMENT

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

ERNAKULAM BENCH

THURSDAY THE 20TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2012

PRESENTS

Hon’ble Dr. KBS Rajan                                            Judicial Member

AND

Hn,ble Ms. K. George Joseph                               Administrative Member

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO. 1186/2012

All India Postal Employees Union, GDS(NFPE)                   : Applicants

R/by its Circle Secy. MS Sabu & Ors.

Versus

The Chief Postmaster General, Kerala Circle                    : Respondents

TVM & Ors

Mr. Vishnu S Chempazhanthiyil                         : Counsel for applicant

M. Varghese for Mr. Mill Dandapani, ACGSE       : Counsel for Respondents.

ORDER

Admit. Mr. Varghese for Mr. Millu Dandapani, ACGSC takes notice on behalf of the respondents.

Respondents are directed to file reply statement with in four weeks time and there after two weeks time is granted to the applicant to file rejoinder, if any.

List before the Registrar’s Court for completion of pleadings on 04.02.2013. Registrar to list the case before the Court after two months including the status relating to completion of pleadings.

MA 1272/12 for joining together is allowed.

As regards interim relief, as the Counsel for the applicant submits that in respect of Group D and Postmen posts, since candidates inducted in these categories from GDS employees would not be direct recruitees, in so far as Group D and Postmen posts are concerned, these posts may not be abolished as decided by the respondents. Accordingly , the respondents shall not take further action in pursuance of the impugned order at Annexure A-5 dated 19.11.12 in respect of Group D and Postmen post without the leave of this Court.

    Sd/-                                   Sd/-

    Ms. K. George Joseph                  S  KBS Rajan   

Administrative Member                     Judicial Member                            

   Stamp CAT                      CERTIFIED TRUE COPY

 Ernakulum Bench  21.12.2012        Deputy Registrar

How to write RTI applications effectively?

*Four golden rules for writing effective RTI Applications*

Dear fellow Activists,

We often sit down to draft an RTI application in an angry and unrealistic mood. When we write RTI applications, our focus should be on getting information. Instead, we are thinking about stopping some wrongdoings, getting some officials and corrupt contractors penalized, making the authorities “answerable” for negligence etc, etc. At such times, we fail to think clearly about the items of information that we need.

Right to Information Act 2005 is a law, and effectiveness in legal work depends on using the law without anger, resentment and wishful thinking.

While asking for information, the 4 golden rules are:

1. Point to various specific documents. Your application should look like a shopping-list of documents.

2. Name documents using words from Sec 2(f) and Sec 4(1)(b) of the RTI Act – reports, logbooks, emails, advices, rules, regulations, manuals etc. Only after exhausting these should you use other similar names e.g. quality audit reports, correspondence etc. In case this information is denied, the similarity of wordings will help you to convince appellate authorities that your requested information is “records” and “information” that must be mandatorily given.

3. Don’t ask questions, don’t demand explanations, and don’t make allegations.

Don’t make your application sound like a letter of complaint or a letter-to-the-editor. Don’t preface it with a covering letter or an introductory paragraph. RTI applications should be emotionless and bland.

4. Avoid vague expressions and requests such as

• What is the status of my complaint?
  What further action has been taken on my complaint/letter?
  Give me action-taken report.
  Words like “status” and “action” are open to interpretation, and usually fail to point towards any particular document; they can mean different things to different persons like applicant, PIO, APIO and appellate authorities. In most cases, there is no such document called “action-taken report” in existence, and therefore, the PIO cannot be rightly asked under RTI to generate such a document in reply to your application; PIO can only be asked to give you copy of a document that exists. The right way is to ask for signed and stamped copy of all correspondence till date in the matter of your complaint, including memos, emails, covering letters for forwarding your complaint etc. Ask for copy of logbook or any other book where details of your complaint are entered, marked to specific officers for their investigation and action. Ask for a copy of all their remarks, feedback, reports etc. If the case on your complaint is closed, ask for the closing remarks of the officer concerned.
• Give particulars of the project to build XYZ.
  What “particulars” do you want? Engineering drawings? Budgets? Financial projections? Feasibility reports? Consultants’ studies? This is not clear. Don’t leave it to the PIO to decide what documents to include and what to leave out. Be specific and name the documents that you want copied. Make it difficult for the PIO to loosely interpret your request.

Prepared by

Shri Sailesh Gandhi

Central Information Commissioner

(Circulated in the interest of the public giving them tips to frame good questions while submitting RTI Applications to get the information)

Courtesy : http://satish24k.blogspot.in/

MACP TO PROMOTEES = DEPARTMENT’S STAND = LATEST POSITION

APPEAL FILED IN JODHPUR HIGH COURT AGAINST CAT JUDGEMENT

Para – 9 of the Annexure – I to DOP&T OM dated 19.05.2009 provides in clearest terms that “regular service for the purpose of MACPS shall commence from the date of joining of the post in direct entry grade on a regular basis or on absorption/re-employment basis.”

The existing statutory Recruitment Rules of Postmen and PA cadre provide for promotion quota to be filled up through LDCE (Limited Departmental Competitive Examination). Para – 5 of Annexure – I of DOPT Order on MACPS provides for ignoring only the promotions/upgradations granted under the ACP scheme (old scheme) in the past to those grades which now carry the same grade pay due to merger of pay scales/up gradation of posts recommended by 6th CPC. Thus the promotions earned through LDCE are not provided to be ignored.

As per the summary record of discussions of the meeting held on 27.07.2012 with the JCM National Council Staff side on issues relating to MACPS (Annexure III to DOP&T OM No 11/2/2008-JCA dated 13.09.2012) it was decided against item No. 4 that treatment of such cases would be on the lines as was under the ACP scheme (old scheme) and Ministry of Railways would examine the matter accordingly. Para 5.1 of Annexure-I to DOP&T OM dated 09.08.1999 relating to ACP Scheme (old scheme) provides for counting of regular promotions earned through LDCE.

So far as the common Judgment of the CAT Jodhpur in OA No. 382/2011, 353/2011 and 354/2011 dated 22.05.2012 is concerned, the CAT held that whenever and official appears in LDCE and gets selected to the post, them it starts new innings for him and for the purpose of counting his stagnation, if any, from the date of joining of the new post alone would be relevant and his previous career advancement cannot be called as promotion within the definition of the word “promotion” for consideration of his eligibility under MACP scheme.

The judgment referred to above is in contradiction to the provisions of the MACPS as also against the decision of the Government against item No. 4 referred to in Annexure – III to DOP&T OM No. 11/2/2008-JCA dated 13.09.2012.

MACP Scheme is the Scheme formulated by DOP&T, the nodal Ministry in this regard. Department of Posts cannot make any change in the scheme. The Department has accordingly referred the issue to the DOP&T and provided the required Recruitment Rules as called for by the DOP&T.

Keeping in view of the existing provisions of the MACP Scheme as also the decision of the Government against item No. 4, Department has filed writ petition (Appeal) before the Hon’ble High court of Jodhpur.

Source : http://www.aipeup3chq.com/