kumarjainn
14 February 2017 at 23:39
sir
I have posed this qs earlier also in the year 2011 now I am again coming with new question in this judgement in my case No. 4545/2000, Delhi High Court.
I was not considered for promotion in the year 1998 from the post of Sc.'C' to Sc. 'D' due to wrong implementation of the rules. I filed a case in CAT. Finally in the year 2011 i succeeded in High court and the judgement was delivered as below. However in the meantime I got promoted from Sc. 'C' to Sc'D' in the year 2001 and subsequently I got promotion as Sc. 'E' and Sc. 'F' . there is contradiction in para 8 and para 9 of the judgement. The last two para 8 and 9 of the judgement are given below:
Para 8.Since the petition filed by the petitioner succeed on this ground itself, it is not necessary to deal with the other contention rested on the retrospective operation of the said rule. Accordingly
W.P. (C) 4545/2000 Page 12 of 12
rule is made absolute. The impugned judgment dated 1st May, 2000 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal is hereby set aside. The O.A. filed by the petitioner before the Tribunal is allowed. As a consequence, direction is issued to the respondent to reconsider the case of the petitioner by holding review DPC and if found suitable for promotion, the petitioner be accorded promotion to the post of scientist "D‟ with effect from the date his juniors were promoted on the basis of Internal Screening Committee which was held on 1st July, 1998.
Para 9. We are informed that the petitioner was subsequently given promotion to the post of scientist 'D‟ w.e.f. 1st July, 1998, he shall be given arrears on repromoted post from 1st July, 1998 to 30th July, 2001 and shall also be entitled to consequential benefits of seniority and promotion etc.
10. Since the respondents have not appeared, no order as to costs.
(A.K. SIKRI) JUDGE (M.L. MEHTA) JUDGE JULY 7,2011 skb
Note: there is a typing error in para 9 in place of (w.e.f. 1st July, 1998 it should be 1st July, 2001)
From the above it is clear that Paara 8 and 9 are contradicting. Paara 8 says that to consider my case for promotion in the year 1998 on the basis recommendation of the review DPC.
And para 9 says to as I am promoted in the year 2001 I should be given promotion w.e.f. 1998 with arrears and consequential benefit. That is Review DPC/assessment is not required.
The department implemented Para 8. I was directed to appear before the Review DPC for the year 1998. Then I received a letter intimating me that the review DPC did not find me fit for promotion in the year 1998. I was not given promotion from the year 1998 etc.
The department implemented the para 8 of the judgement no doubt. fine
But department has not implemented the Para 9 of the judgement according to which since i was promoted to the post of Scientist 'D' in the year 2001 I should have been given promotion from the year 1998 with arrears and consequential benefits.
This para does not ask for the views of review DPC. The result of 2001 has to be implemented with effect from 1998.
Thus Para 9 of the judgement has not been implemented. IS it a fit case for filing contempt of court or not. If yes,
can I file contempt for not implementing para 9 of the judgement now after a delay of five years. pl advice.
In fact department should have implemented para 9 of the judgment which is final para of the judgment. In case department department wishes to implement para 8 it should also implement para 9 of the judgment. my contention is Not implementing para 9 of the judgment is contempt of court.
Tek Chand
14 February 2017 at 22:46
I have filed an appeal under PP Act in the District Court, PH courts against recovery order against me passed by estate officer. Can I request the court for referring the matter to mediation cell.Other party is not keen. Also, do parties have to bear any expenditure for mediation. Kindly guide me about it all.
Snmurthykala
14 February 2017 at 21:25
Sir,
I served in one NGO Hospital for 6 years and resigned 9 months ago. My salary breakup was as under:
Basic: Rs.6660; HRA Rs.2664; Special Pay Rs. 7326/-.
While settling the gratuity payable, the Management has not been considered the 'Special Pay' saying that 'Special Pay' cannot be taken into account while calculating the 'Gratuity' which will be calculated on the basis of 'Basic' only. Kindly advice as to whether the 'Special Pay' be considered in the absence of ' Dearness Allowance '. Kindly clarify.
KS Murthy
Niraj
14 February 2017 at 21:10
Sir,
My brother in law was recently died. He had jointly shared ground and first floor home measuring 70sq yrds with his brother. After death of my brother in law his brother is trying to take 100% share and trying to sell the home without giving share to widow. After consultation of a layer, advised me to file a division petition in civil court and court fee will attract 5% of circle rate of the area of 35 sq yrd i.e approx. Rs. 80000/- as court fee.
I am unable to pay the hefty court fee.
Kindly guide me how to induct the name of widow in registree paper and his brother can not able to sell the home.
with regards thanks
V. G. KRISHGOPI
14 February 2017 at 20:30
Dear Sir/madam,
A Couple (Adjacent resident) occupied my land. a civil case has been filed on them. to threaten me they gave a false case on me that i have tared her cloth and came to kill her with a sharp iron rod. the cop filed FIR on me. they have not produced any medical certificate or show any injury to the cops and to the court after investigating the cops closed the file saying mistake of facts.what legal action can be take against them for giving a false case against me.
D Nanda Kumar
14 February 2017 at 20:10
JGD
1.Worked in nationalised Bank for 39 years and retired in March, 2010
2.Got promoted from Scale I to II in April, 1993 but result held in sealed cover due to pending case in CBI Special court, Mumbai.
3.Applied for promotion from Scale II to III conducted in 1998 but denied opportunity due non release of promotion on adhoc basis.
4.Got acquitted on merits by the Court in March, 2014 (after retirement).
5.The Bank has released the promotion held in sealed cover with notional effective date of April, 1993 with due benefits now in January, 2017.
6.Subsequent to that I have claimed that the Bank should consider my promotion from Scale II to III which was denied to me in 1998 based on my ARRs which are excellent during the period relevant to that period (it is in fact excellent throughout till retirement which has been admitted to by the Bank).
I want to know:
1.Whether my claim is as per provisions of sealed cover procedure?
2.Is there any decision in the High Court/Supreme court to support my claim?
3.If the Bank does not consider, whether I can approach a court and how?
4.If I get the said promotion released with notional back date can I claim further promotions on various future dates?
Anonymous
14 February 2017 at 19:29
Hello sir,
Recently I applied for a passport and come up with adverse police verification due to criminal case is pending against me.
I had not disclosed the information regarding the criminal case since I was misguided by one of my friend. I thought the case has been discharged.
There are 131 accused in this case. I was falsely got involved by my friend. He had deposited a fraudulent cheque in my account. I was not aware of the cheque deposited by him, later he told me that he has deposited the same.
I got anticipatory bail. But after that no any summons or warrant issued to me.
The case is not on board from 2012 in the court. Please help me what I can do to get the passport with 10 years validity.
Thanks.
deepak
14 February 2017 at 18:27
My mother has fixed deposit in well known bank and she deceased on september 2015. and for those fixed deposit unknown person in my family is given as nominee, and relation shown as son. i am only child of my mother. i asked bank to provide the orginal nomination from signed by mother for which bank replied saying orginal nomination form lost/not traceable so obtain sucession certificate. i feel bank has done mistake while entering the nomination so requested them to pay the cost of obtain sucession certificate. which they are not ready. guide me how this problem can be resolved
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
MACT and Lawyer
In October 2015, I filed a MACT case against an army truck driver who killed my brother. I hired a lawyer who said he would take 20% commission from the compensation(I would get) as his case fee. Now, it seems I am on the brink of losing the case and there is a hearing next week that might be the last hearing. But now, my lawyer is threatening me by saying he won't attend the hearing unless I pay him Rs 1.5 lac. What should I do now?