Cat daily wagertemprary status in Marathi

Cat daily wager temprary status 

BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL TN AT CHENNAI

O. A. No:________/:_________/:________

Applicant 

Versus

Respondents 

Application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act

Chennai 

Applicant 

______ 

Through, Advocate 

Respectfully Sheweth: 

Details of application: 

1. Particulars of Orders Against Which this Application is Made: 

That this application is made against the action, rather inaction of the respondents whereby they are not conferring the temporary status on the applicant wef __________________, ie; on completion of 206 days in a given calendar year and not granting other consequential benefits as prayed for herein below. 

The application is also against the arbitrary and unconstitutional clause in the Casual Labourers (Grant of Temporary Status and Regularization) Scheme of Government of India, 1993 (A-1). 

2. Jurisdiction of Tribunal: 

That the applicant declares that the subject matter of this application is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal and it is competent to issue the directions to the respondents for full compliance. 

3. Limitation: 

That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation period as prescribed in section 21 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act 1985. 

4. Facts of the Case: 

(4.1) That the applicant submits that he was initially engaged by the respondent department as _____________ wef __________ (A-2 & A-3) in the exigencies of service initially for spell of one months thereafter giving extensions of 29 days and in such manner the applicant has completed more than 206 days in any given year as per the details annexed as Annexure A-4. It is humbly submitted that the applicant was engaged to perform the duties of regular nature and the applicant was recruited against the existing permanent post. 

(4.2) That ever since the appointment of the applicant, the applicant is performing his duties with the utmost devotion and sincerity to the entire satisfaction of his superior officers. 

(4.3) That it is also pertinent to mention here that the appointment of the applicant is against the permanent sanctioned post and the sanction for the said post is being granted by the competent authority from time to time (A-5). It is also respectfully submitted that the duties being performed by the applicant are same and similar to the duties of the regular hands. 

(4.4) That with the efflux of time the applicant has got vested rights to be conferred upon a temporary status in accordance with the rules and regulations and thereafter to be granted consequential benefits as well as to be regularized. 

(4.5) That accordingly the applicant as well as the other similarly situated persons have applied on :______ (A-6) to the respondent department to grant temporary status as well as other consequential benefits. The said representation of the applicant was further routed to the appropriate authority by the respondent department. (A-7). 

(4.6) That however, the competent authority has turned down the representation of the applicant on _____________ (A-8) and other similarly situated persons with the objection that the temporary status could be granted to only those casual workers who were in employment on the date of issue of the OM (A-1). 

(4.7) That it is also pertinent to submit here with that in the meantime some of the similarly situated persons have filed an OA No. :_________ titled as :___________ Vs :___________, wherein this Hon'ble Tribunal was pleased to direct the respondents to consider the representations of the applicants therein. As such the applicant was also waiting for the outcome of the consideration of the representations of those applicants. 

(4.8) That it is also pertinent to submit herewith that the respondent department has conferred benefits envisaged as under the annexure A-1 to the similarly situated persons at :_________ (A-9) and at :______ (A-10). Thus the applicant can not be discriminated upon in such manner for grant of temporary status as well as the other consequential benefits. 

5. Grounds for Relief: 

That the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of other: 

(5.1) That the clause 3 of the impugned OM (A-1) and the impugned orderA-8 are malafide, arbitrary, discriminatory and issued in utter violation of rules, regulations, and is violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and natural justice. 

(5.2) That the clause 3 of the Scheme (A-1) is arbitrary and unconstitutional and ultravires to the extent it makes the scheme applicable only to those casual labourers who were in employment on the date of issuance of the said scheme, ie; :_________________________.. 

(5.3) That the impugned cut-off date is unconstitutional and ultra vires and creates unreasonable classification between the Casual Labourers and has no nexus with the object of granting temporary status to the similarly situated casual labourers so as to avoid their exploitation and unfair labour practice. 

(5.4) That the respondent Union of India has created distinction between the Casual Labourers which is not based on any intelligible differentia which can distinguish Casual Labourers grouped together for the purpose of extending the benefits under the Scheme and has no nexus with the object of stopping unfair labour practice sought to be achieved, by the Scheme of 1993. 

(5.5) That the differentia on which the classification is founded is lacking in rational relation to the object sought to be achieved by the impugned scheme and the order under challenge. 

(5.6) That the impugned clause does not sub serve the purpose sought to be achieved. 

(5.7) That the classification in the impugned definition is against well settled principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and other Hon'ble High Courts and this Hon'ble Tribunal in catena of cases. 

(5.8) That otherwise also it was incumbent upon the respondents to review and revise the it strength position of regular and permanent employee as the applicant has continued for a considerably long period justifying his regularization against the regular post which is existing in the respondent department as is clear from A-5. 

(5.9) That the respondent Union of India to is arbitrarily not amending or relaxing the provision of the Clause No. 4 under the provisions of clause No. 11 of the said Scheme, so as to make it applicable to all casual employees/labourers who have been engaged after the date of issuance of this scheme so as to bring the scheme in consonance with the Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; 

(5.10) That the respondents are stopped due to their own act, deed and conduct. The principle of promissory Stopple applies against the respondents. 

(5.11) That the impugned order of the respondents is also against the well settled principles laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India and this Hon'ble Tribunal in catena of cases. 

6. Details of Remedies Exhausted: 

That the applicant has exhausted all the remedies available to him. Moreover, the matter being of urgent nature, the applicant has no other way but to approach this Hon'ble Tribunal for speedy and efficacious remedy for staying and quashing the impugned order. 

7. Matters not Previously Filed or Pending with any Other Court: 

The applicant further declare that he has not filed any application, writ petition or suit regarding the matter in respect of which this application has been made in any court, other authority or any other Bench of this Hon'ble Tribunal. No such application, writ petition or suit is pending before any of them. 

8. Reliefs Sought: 

That in view of the facts in para 4 above and the grounds in para 5 supra, your Lordship's humble applicant prays for the following reliefs: 

(a) Quash the impugned action of the respondents whereby they are not conferring the temporary status on the applicant wef _____________

www.contracteasily.com

दैनंदिन मजुरीसाठी मांजरीची तात्पुरती स्थिती

चेन्नई येथील माननीय केंद्रीय प्रशासकीय न्यायाधिकरणासमोर

OA क्रमांक :_ ______/:______/:______

अर्जदार

विरुद्ध

प्रतिसादकर्ते

केंद्रीय प्रशासकीय न्यायाधिकरण कायद्याच्या कलम 19 अंतर्गत अर्ज

चेन्नई

अर्जदार

_______

द्वारे, अधिवक्ता

आदरपूर्वक शेवेथ :

अर्जाचा तपशील:

1. हा अर्ज ज्याच्या विरोधात केला आहे त्या आदेशांचे तपशील:

की हा अर्ज प्रतिवादींच्या निष्क्रीय निष्क्रियतेच्या विरोधात केला गेला आहे ज्याद्वारे ते अर्जदारांना रेशन भत्ता अनुमती देत नाहीत भारत सरकारच्या निर्देशांच्या तरतुदींसह (परिशिष्ट A-1).

2. न्यायाधिकरणाचे कार्यक्षेत्र: अर्जदार घोषित करतो की या अर्जाची विषयवस्तू या

माननीय न्यायाधिकरणाच्या अधिकारक्षेत्रात आहे आणि ती पूर्ण पालनासाठी प्रतिवादींना निर्देश जारी करण्यास सक्षम आहे.

3. मर्यादा:

अर्जदार पुढे घोषित करतो की अर्ज केंद्रीय प्रशासकीय न्यायाधिकरण अधिनियम 1985 च्या कलम 21 मध्ये विहित केलेल्या मर्यादेच्या कालावधीत आहे.

4. प्रकरणातील तथ्य:

(4.1) येथे अर्जदार काम करत आहेत किंवा त्यांच्यासोबत काम केले आहे. मंत्री कर्मचार्‍यांच्या क्षमतेनुसार __ येथील प्रतिवादी विभाग, म्हणजे ; UDCs, AIs, स्टेनोस आणि शिपाई इ. आणि सर्व अर्जदारांची समान तक्रार आहे कारण प्रतिवादी विभाग समानतेवर रेशन भत्ता मंजूर करत नाही तसेच कार्यकारी कर्मचार्‍यांना सरकारी सूचनांचे पालन करून मंजूर केले जात आहे . A-1), अर्जदार तसेच कार्यकारी कर्मचारी समान परिस्थितीत आणि समान कामाच्या तासांसाठी समान ठिकाणी काम करत असूनही आणि दोन्ही श्रेणींच्या कर्तव्यांचे स्वरूप समान आणि समान आहे.

(4.2) भारत सरकारने परिच्छेद 3 द्वारे सूचना (A-1) जारी केल्या आहेत, ज्यातील काही सवलतींसाठी परिशिष्ट-II मध्ये दर्शविल्यानुसार विविध त्रासदायक स्थाने 'B' आणि 'C' स्थानके म्हणून वर्गीकृत केली आहेत. पत्र तथापि, जर विभाग प्रमुखांना ठराविक वेळेस असे वाटत असेल की काही ठिकाणे किंवा असाइनमेंट विशेष धोकादायक बनल्या आहेत आणि कर्मचारी आणि/किंवा परिसराला धोका वाढला आहे, तर ते कष्ट आणि कालावधीच्या निकषांवर गुणवत्तेनुसार ठरवू शकतात. ज्यासाठी अशी स्थाने लेखी कारणे नोंदवल्यानंतर श्रेणी 'B' आणि 'C' स्थानकांमध्ये वर्गीकृत केली जाऊ शकतात.
(४.३) त्यानुसार सध्याचे अर्जदार जिथे काम करत आहेत किंवा काम केले आहे, ते वरील सूचनांनुसार (A-1) नुसार सर्व लाभांचा विस्तार करण्यासाठी त्यानुसार श्रेणी __ (परिशिष्ट A-2) म्हणून वर्गीकृत करण्यात आले आहे. तथापि, प्रतिवादी विभागाने एकाच ठिकाणी काम करणार्‍या मंत्री आणि कार्यकारी कर्मचार्‍यांच्या श्रेणींमध्ये समान आणि तत्सम परिस्थितीत रेशन भत्ता मंजूर करण्यासाठी असमंजसपणाचे आणि अवास्तव वर्गीकरण केले आहे. मंत्रालयीन कर्मचार्‍यांना ते नाकारण्यात आले आहे आणि प्रतिवादी विभागाने काढलेले हे वर्गीकरण परिशिष्ट A-1 द्वारे भारत
सरकारने साध्य करू इच्छित असलेल्या वस्तूशी कोणताही संबंध न ठेवता त्यांच्या कल्पनेची प्रतिमा आहे.

(4.4) प्रतिवादी विभागाच्या या मनमानी कृतीला त्याच विभागाच्या कर्मचार्‍यांनी :_ _____ येथे माननीय केंद्रीय प्रशासकीय न्यायाधिकरण, :______ खंडपीठासमोर दोन OAs1 मध्ये आव्हान दिले होते, असे आदरपूर्वक सादर केले जाते, या निर्णयाच्या प्रती तुमच्या लॉर्डशिप्सच्या कृपापरीक्षणासाठी ते (परिशिष्ट A-3) आणि (परिशिष्ट A-4) प्रमाणे जोडले आहेत.

(4.5) यासह सादर करणे देखील उचित आहे की (A-3 आणि A-4) च्या अनुषंगाने, प्रतिवादी क्र. 2 ने दिनांक :_ _____ (परिशिष्ट A-5) च्या संप्रेषणाद्वारे प्रकरण प्रतिवादी क्र. 1, त्यातील अर्जदारांना रेशन भत्ता मंजूर करण्यासाठी आवश्यक आदेश जारी करणे. सर्व नैतिकतेनुसार, प्रतिवादी विभागाने आता इतर सर्व समान स्थितीत असलेल्या व्यक्तींना खटल्याच्या
कठड्यात न अडकवता त्यांना लाभ द्यायला हवा होता .

(4.6) अर्जदार क्रमांक 1 तसेच इतर काही अर्जदारांनी देखील (A-3 आणि A) लक्षात घेऊन त्यांना समान लाभ देण्यासाठी __ :____ (परिशिष्ट A-6) वर प्रतिवादी विभागाकडे अर्ज पाठविला आहे. -4), परंतु कोणत्याही फलदायी परिणामांशिवाय. त्यामुळे हे ओ.ए. 

5. दिलासा मिळण्याची कारणे:

अर्जदार खालील कारणास्तव या माननीय न्यायाधिकरणाकडे इतरांमध्‍ये सहभागी होण्‍याची मागणी करत आहे, त्‍यापैकी प्रत्‍येक एक पूर्वग्रह न ठेवता आणि इतरांपेक्षा स्‍वतंत्र आहे:

(5.1) प्रतिवादी विभागाची चुकीची कारवाई ज्याद्वारे ते अनुमती देत नाहीत __ अर्जदारांना रेशन भत्ता हा गैरप्रकार , मनमानी, भेदभाव करणारा आहे आणि नियम, नियमांचे पूर्णपणे उल्लंघन करून जारी केला आहे आणि भारतीय राज्यघटनेच्या कलम 14 आणि 16 आणि नैसर्गिक न्यायाचे
उल्लंघन आहे.

(५.२) प्रतिवादी विभाग समान नियुक्त कर्मचार्‍यांमध्ये काल्पनिक आधारावर वर्गीकरण काढू शकत नाही आणि असे वर्गीकरण मनमानी आणि बेकायदेशीर आहे आणि श्रेणी 'ब' किंवा 'क' अंतर्गत जागा वर्गीकृत करून साध्य करू इच्छित असलेल्या वस्तूंशी कोणताही संबंध नाही . त्या वर्गीकृत ठिकाणी काम करणाऱ्या सर्व व्यक्तींना सर्व फायदे मंजूर करण्यासाठी. कायद्यानुसार असे भेदभाव करणारे वर्गीकरण अनुज्ञेय नाही.

(5.3) ते परिशिष्ट A-1 मधील परिच्छेद 3 विभाग प्रमुखांना ibid पत्राच्या परिशिष्ट-I मध्ये आधीच विहित केलेल्या सवलतींपेक्षा अधिक सवलती देण्यास परवानगी देतो. विभागप्रमुखांना या सवलती कमी करण्याची परवानगी कुठेही मिळत नाही. एकदा 'ब' किंवा 'क' श्रेणीमध्ये एखाद्या जागेचे वर्गीकरण झाल्यानंतर, परिशिष्ट-I मध्ये आधीच नमूद केलेल्या सवलती कमी न करता समान सवलती दिल्या जातील. विभाग प्रमुख विशेष परिस्थितीत त्यापेक्षा जास्त सवलती देऊ शकतात आणि परिशिष्ट-I मध्ये आधीच नमूद केलेल्या सवलती कमी करू शकत नाहीत.

www.contracteasily.com

Cat temp status to daily wages in Marathi

0 views

0 downloads

मेहरबान न्यायालय दिवाणी न्यायाधीश (वरिष्ठ स्तर) / जिल्हा न्यायालय, [जिल्हा, महाराष्ट्र]

दिवाणी संकीर्ण अर्ज (Civil Misc. Application) क्रमांक: _______ / २०२_

:: बाबत ::
विषय: वारंवार विनाकारण तारीख पुढे ढकलणाऱ्या पक्षकारावर सुनावणी खर्चाचा (Costs for Delay) दंड आकारणे | स्वरूप: दिवाणी प्रक्रिया संहिता अंतर्वर्ती अर्ज
स्थान / पोलीस ठाणे हद्द: [जिल्हा] | जिल्हा: [महाराष्ट्र]

[वादी / अर्जदाराचे नाव], वय अंदाजे [__] वर्षे, व्यवसाय: [व्यवसाय/व्यापार], रा. [संपूर्ण पत्ता, तालुका, जिल्हा, महाराष्ट्र]।	... वादी / अर्जदार
--- विरुद्ध ---
[प्रतिवादी / गैरअर्जदाराचे नाव], वय अंदाजे [__] वर्षे, व्यवसाय: [व्यवसाय/नोकरी], रा. [संपूर्ण पत्ता, तालुका, जिल्हा, महाराष्ट्र]।	... प्रतिवादी / गैरअर्जदार

::: अनुक्रमणिका (INDEX) :::

अ.क्र.	दस्तऐवज / अर्जाचा तपशील	पृष्ठ क्रमांक
१.	मूळ कलम ३५बी सीपीसी ( वारंवार तहकुबी घेऊन विलंब करणाऱ्या पक्षकारावर दैनिक खर्च लादणेबाबत अर्ज ) - न्यायहिताचा अंतर्वर्ती अर्ज अंतर्गत कलम ३५ख, दिवाणी प्रक्रिया संहिता, १९०८	२ - ४
२.	दावा / अर्ज समर्थनार्थ प्रतिज्ञापत्र (ऑर्डर १९ सीपीसी)	५ - ६
३.	सत्यतेचे कथन व कायदेशीर पडताळणी (ऑर्डर ६ नियम १५ए सीपीसी)	७
४.	दस्तऐवजी पुराव्यांची यादी व आवश्यक सहपत्रे www.contracteasily.com 172. Section 35B CPC (Application for imposition of daily costs on party in delay by repeated adjournments) in Marathi 0 views 0 downloads Cat temp status to daily wages  BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL TN AT CHENNAI O. A. No:_______/:______/:______                 Applicants                    Versus              Respondents  Application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act Chennai  Applicant  _______  Through, Advocate  Respectfully Sheweth:  Details of application:  1. Particulars of Orders Against Which this Application is Made:  That this application is made against the impugned inaction of the respondents whereby they are not allowing the Ration Allowance to the applicants in accordance with the provisions of Govt of India instructions1 (Annexure A-1).  2. Jurisdiction of Tribunal:  That the applicant declares that the subject matter of this application is within the jurisdiction of this Hon'ble Tribunal and it is competent to issue the directions to the respondents for full compliance.  3. Limitation:  That the applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation period as prescribed in section 21 of the Central Administrative Tribunals Act 1985.  4. Facts of the Case:  (4.1) That the applicants herein are working or have worked with the respondent department at __ in the capacity of ministerial staff, ie; as UDCs, AIs, Stenos and Peons etc. and all of the applicants have common grievance in as much as the respondent department is not allowing the Ration Allowance on the analogy the same is being granted to the Executive Staff in pursuance to the Govt instructions2 (A-1), despite the fact that the applicants as well as the executive staff are working at the similar locations under the similar circumstances and for the similar working hours and the nature of duties of both the categories are same and similar.  (4.2) That the Govt of India has issued instructions (A-1) vide para 3 of which for some of the concessions the various hardship locations have been categorized as 'B' & 'C' stations as indicated in Annexure-II to this letter. However, if the Heads of the Departments feel at certain times that certain locations or assignments have become specially hazardous and there is a specific increase in the threat to the personnel and/or premises, they can determine on merits the criteria of hardship and the period for which such locations may be categorized as belonging to category 'B' & 'C' stations after recording the reasons in writing.  (4.3) That accordingly the location where the present applicants are working or have worked, the same has been accordingly categorized as Category __ (Annexure A-2) for extending all the benefits as envisaged under the above instructions (A-1). However, the respondent department has drawn irrational and unreasonable classification between the categories of Ministerial and Executive staff working at the same place under the same and similar circumstances for grant of Ration Allowance in as much as the Ration Allowance is being granted to the Executive staff whereas the same has been denied to the Ministerial Staff and this classification drawn by the respondent department is a figment of their imagination without having any nexus to the object sought to be achieved by the Govt of India vide Annexure A-1.  (4.4) That it is respectfully submitted that this arbitrary action of the respondent department was challenged by the staff of the same department at :______ before the Hon'ble Central Administrative Tribunal, :______ Bench in two OAs1, copies of the decision of the same are annexed herewith as (Annexure A-3) and (Annexure A-4) for kind perusal of your Lordships.  (4.5) That it is also pertinent to submit herewith that in pursuance to (A-3 & A-4), the respondent No. 2 has moved the case vide communication dated :______ (Annexure A-5) to the respondent No. 1, for issuance of necessary orders authorizing grant of Ration Allowance to the applicants therein. In all morality, the respondent department should have now granted the benefit to all others similarly situated persons without putting them through the rigours of litigation.  (4.6) That the applicant No. 1 as well as the other few applicants have also moved application to the respondent department on _ :____ (Annexure A-6) to extend the similar benefit to them in view of (A-3 & A-4), but without any fruitful results. Hence this OA.  5. Grounds for Relief:  That the applicant seeks the indulgence of this Hon'ble Tribunal on the following grounds amongst others, each one of which is without prejudice to and independent of other:  (5.1) That the impugned action of the respondent department whereby they are not allowing __ Ration Allowance to the applicants is malafide, arbitrary, discriminatory and issued in utter violation of rules, regulations, and is violative of Article 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and natural justice.  (5.2) That the respondent department can not draw classification on fictional basis amongst the similarly placed employees and such a classification is arbitrary and illegal and bears no nexus with the object sought to be achieved by categorizing the places under category 'B' or 'C' for grant of all the benefits to all the persons working under those categorized locations. Such a discriminatory classification is not permissible under the law.  www.contracteasily.com Cat temp status to daily wages 0 views 0 downloads