UNION OF INDIA Vs. NARENDER SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The union of India and the Additional Commissioner of Police (OPS), New Delhi have questioned correctness of the order passed by a Division Bench of the Delhi. High Court dismissing writ petition filed by the present appellants as infructuous.

(2.) The controversy lies within a very narrow compass and is as under: Respondent (herein referred to as the employee) was proceeded against departmentally on the charge that on 27/28.2.1996 while posted in the vigilance cell at the Indira Gandhi International Airport he accepted illegal gratification for getting two Afghan nationals cleared through Customs without paying the Customs duty payable. He was ultimately dismissed by the disciplinary authority by order dated 7.8.1997. The appeal preferred by him was also rejected by the appellate authority by order dated 20.11.1997. Challenging these orders the respondent-employee filed Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi (in short the Tribunal). By order dated 21.11.2000, the Tribunal quashed and set aside the order of dismissal dated 7.8.1997 passed by the disciplinary authority as also the order dated 20.11.1997 passed by the appellate authority. The respondent-employee was directed to be reinstated forthwith. The order passed by the Tribunal was questioned by the present appellant by filing writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, 1950 (in short the Constitution). The Division Bench of the Delhi High Court by its order dated 5.12.2001 dismissed the writ petition as infructuous by observing as follows:

(3.) Stand of the appellant in the present appeal is that the view taken by the High Court is clearly untenable. Merely because the respondent-employee had been reinstated in service pursuant to impugned orders that did not render the petition infructuous.