UNION OF INDIA Vs. GAJANAN N BHAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed by the Union of India assailing the order dtd. 16/8/2022 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru (hereinafter referred to as, 'the Tribunal', for short) in O.A.No.170/650/2019 wherein the Tribunal has allowed the petition of the respondent by quashing the memo dtd. 8/6/2018 issued by the respondent No.3 therein and directed the petitioners to make payment of full pay and allowances as admissible to the respondent during the period off duty from 9/3/2013 to 4/9/2018.

(2.) Brief facts giving raise to filing of the present petition are that the respondent No.1 was appointed as GDP in Karwar division. It is alleged that, the respondent has committed misappropriation during the period from 30/8/2002 to 30/12/2009, hence he was placed on "put off duty" on 9/3/2013. The disciplinary actions were initiated against the respondent and on completion of enquiry, the enquiry officer submitted enquiry report on 27/6/2017. The respondent was provided with an opportunity to submit a representation on the report and the petitioner No.3 passed an order dtd. 1/5/2018 imposing a penalty of censure. Further, the petitioners issued a memo dtd. 8/6/2018 clarifying the put off duty period (suspension period) and ordered "the period of put off duty from 9/3/2013 to 30/4/2018 was treated as GDS BPM which means the GDS has already been paid subsistence allowance and no further pay allowance shall be made". The respondent assailed the memo dtd. 8/6/2018 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru in O.A.No.170/650/2019. The Tribunal has allowed the application. In the above factual matrix, the present petition is filed assailing the order of the Tribunal.

(3.) Learned counsel Sri Mrutyunjay S. Hallikeri for petitioners submits that the Tribunal has committed an error in allowing the application and it has failed to consider the specific contention of the petitioners that the respondent was placed under 'put off duty' from 9/3/2013 to 30/4/2018 under Rule 12(3) of GDS (C and E) Rules, 2011 which clearly stipulates that a Sevak shall be entitled 25% of his salary as ex-gratia payment and if he is exonerated from duty, he shall be entitled for full salary with admissible allowances. The Tribunal has failed to take note of the initiation of the proceedings against the respondent. The petitioners have awarded penalty of censure and he was not fully exonerated, hence, the respondent is not entitled to the compensation more than 25% which already he has received. The Tribunal has committed error in not appreciating the material on record in its proper prospective resulting in issuing direction to the petitioners to pay the allowances during the put off duty period, hence, sought to allow the petition.