LAWS(KAR)-1981-10-21

RAMAMURTHY T N Vs. UNION OF INDIA

Decided On October 19, 1981
RAMAMURTHY.T.N Appellant
V/S
UNION OF INDIA Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prior to 8-1-1976, the petitioner was working as an Inspector of Central Excise, Statistics, Bellary of the Central Excise and Customs Department of the Union of India. By an order bearing No. C. II/10A/1/76A. 3 dated, 8.1.76 (Annexure-A), respondent No. 4 placed the petitioner under suspension pending initiation of a disciplinary proceeding against him. Accordingly a disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and the same culminated in an order bearing No., C.II/10A/3/75 A. 3 dated 17-12-1977 (Annexure-D) made by respondent No. 4 imposing the penalty of stoppage of one increment for a period of one year without cumulative effect which order has become final.

(2.) In pursuance of the aforesaid order dated 17-12-1977 (Annexure-D) of respondent No. 4, the petitioner was not immediately reinstated to duty for which reason he made representations for his reinstatement and payment of salary and allowances due to him. But, still respondent No. 4 or any other higher authority did not accede to the demands made by the petitioner. At that stage the petitioner on 2.11.77 approached this Court for the various main and interim reliefs sought in his petition. On 8-11-1978 this Court issued rule nisi, but did not make any interim order in the case.

(3.) Some time after respondent No. 4 made his order dated 17-12-1977, another disciplinary proceeding was started against the petitioner which was pending when this writ petition was presented and pending before this Court. In that disciplinary proceeding, respondent No. 4 made an order on 2-11-1978 removing the petitioner from service. Against the said order of removal made by respondent No. 4, the petitioner filed an appeal before the appropriate appellate authority, which allowed the same, set aside the order made by respondent No. 4 and directed the reinstatement of the petitioner to service. In pursuance of the aforesaid order of the appellate authority, the petitioner was rightly reinstated to service.