PARWATI DEVI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted. Heard the parties.

(2.) THE appellant is the widow of A. Bahadur, a Railway employee. A departmental enquiry was held against the employee in regard to the charge of unauthorised absence from 6. 6. 1995 and punishment of removal was imposed on 5. 12. 1997. The employee died in the year 2000. The appellant, on becoming aware of the order of removal in 2001, filed an appeal which was rejected. Thereafter, she approached the Central Administrative Tribunal which remitted the matter to the disciplinary authority for reconsidering the punishment. The said order was challenged before the High Court and the High Court by the impugned order modified the order of the Tribunal. The High Court held that the disciplinary proceedings was conducted in violation of the rules of natural justice and, therefore, the order imposing penalty was invalid and nonest. However, having regard to the fact that the delinquent employee had expired and the proceedings were being pursued by the widow, the High Court was of the view that instead of permitting the authorities to start an enquiry denovo, the matter should be disposed of with liberty to the authorities to impose a penalty other than removal or dismissal. The said order is under challenge in this appeal by special leave.

(3.) AT this stage, Mr. Amarendra Sharan, learned Additional Solicitor General, appearing for the respondents submitted that the respondents are willing to grant family pension to the appellant making it clear that it was offered on the peculiar facts of the case and the same not being treated as precedent. Learned counsel for the appellant agreed that the matter can be treated as closed if the appellant is given family pension.