CAT judgments refer to the legal rulings and decisions made by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) in India. CAT is a specialized tribunal that hears cases related to the service matters of government employees and public servants. The CAT judgments cover a wide range of issues, including recruitment, promotions, pay scales, disciplinary actions, and other employment-related disputes. Staying updated with CAT judgments is crucial for government employees, employers, and legal professionals to understand the precedents set by the tribunal and navigate administrative and employment law matters effectively. This description highlights the significance of CAT judgments and their relevance in shaping the landscape of government employment disputes in India.
Income Tax : The appointment to the post of President and VP is by way of selection based on merit and not by way of promotion. No reservation ...
Corporate Law : Commission has no jurisdiction to hand over the possession of plot in question to the complainant; that is the task of the Civil C...
Corporate Law : There cannot be any dispute that Karanataka High Court has specifically held that the provisions of the MRTP Act were not and coul...
Commission has no jurisdiction to hand over the possession of plot in question to the complainant; that is the task of the Civil Court. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the closest term has restrained to this Commission from assuming the power of the Civil Court. It is also clarified in the paragraph that this Court cannot grant any specific performance.
There cannot be any dispute that Karanataka High Court has specifically held that the provisions of the MRTP Act were not and could not be applicable to the educational institutions. There is no dispute that the present complaint also pertains to the educational institution and its activity of imparting education.
The appointment to the post of President and VP is by way of selection based on merit and not by way of promotion. No reservation can apply where the appointment is not by way of direct recruitment. Observations made in G.E. Veerabhadrappa vs. UOI that the appointment of VP is by way of direct recruitment are obiter and of no legal effect.
