If u r made a member of CAT

First it has to be seen that the case is filed within the limitation period.  if yes, then the case follows on merit.  the administration is alleging the employee absconded (actually the appropriate expression shall be abandoned) and the onus is on the administration to prove the charge of abandonment.  to prove this charge, the admn. should show the court the memos issued on the last known address of the employee and in the event of non-receipt, go for paper publication and later on hold departmental enquiry and declare that he has abandoned his services.  In the meantime, the employee has got abundant evidence to prove that he has been at regular intervals is asking the admn. for his services.  The application of the employee, in my opinion, shall be allowed.  

Dear Hema,

My petition was within the limitation period, and only, therefore, entertained by the CAT.

No step/action, as reqd and mentioned by u was taken by the DRM/NR/Luck, while I had submitted large number of applications/representations, requesting 2 b allowed to join duty.

As recorded in the Judgment that the Respondent neither accepted nor denied the fact about the petitioner's applications for duty, does it mean concealment of material facts in his reply by the DRM, the respondent?

Do such Judgments call 4 drastic action against the CAT's member, 2 avoid reccurance? Can the provision of an ambudsman improve the matters? Is there any other solution?

As recorded in the Judgment that the Respondent neither accepted nor denied the fact about the petitioner's applications for duty, does it mean concealment of material facts in his reply by the DRM, the respondent?

if the judgement has gone against the applicant and the applicant could not get the desired relief, the appropriate action is to file an appeal (writ before the division bench of the concerned High Court against CAT judgment) within 90 days (ordinarily) of the passing of the CAT judgment.

I think it is the mistake of an employee when he was on duty for FIOUR DAYS he should not have filled in leave form.

He have the evidence to prove that he wanted to join the duty which was ignored by his immidiate superior. he should have approached to the DRM.

When the learned CAT passed order: The DRM who has neither accepted nor denied the receipt of the large number of representations of the petitioner, asserts that the petitioner absconded ? is, hereby, directed to reconsider the petitioner's claim?

I feel the CAT must come out from the cage and see/ verify the documentry evidence produced before them and must call the DRM if he is not obeying the order of the CAT.

I feel that best action is to file a writ before the division bench of the concerned High Court against CAT judgment  within 90 days ordinarily of the passing of the CAT judgment.