UNION OF INDIA Vs. GANGA PRASAD PANDEY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the instant petition, the petitioners have prayed for quashing of the order dated 20th August, 2009 (Annexure-P/1) passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, Circuit Camp, Bilaspur (for short 'the Tribunal'). Briefly stated facts of the case are that disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent on the allegation that while working as Extra Departmental Branch Post Master Khadgaon (Chirmiri), he defalcated and misappropriated a sum of Rs. 2,224/- between 18-1-1988 and 7-4-1988 and punishment of dismissal from service was imposed. However, statutory appeal of the respondent was allowed and the Appellate Authority after setting aside the penalty ordered de novo enquiry. The Superintendent of Post Office vide order dated 30th January 2001 (Annexure-A/4) imposed penalty of removal from service. No appeal was preferred against the above order of punishment. The respondent was also facing criminal prosecution under Criminal Case No. 526/ 2000 precisely on the same incident and allegations for offence under Section 409 of the IPC and learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class Manendragarh vide judgment dated 19-9-2007 (Annexure-A/5) acquitted him of the charge under Section 409 of the IPC with a finding that the prosecution has failed to prove the charge against the respondent/accused beyond all reasonable doubt.

(2.) The respondent made a representation to the Superintendent Post Office on 3rd October, 2007 (Annexure-A/6) and prayed for setting aside the order of removal from service dated 30th January 2001 and to reinstate him in service on the ground that he has been acquitted of all the charges by the Court. Thereafter on 14-1-2008 the respondent preferred an appeal before the Post Master General (Annexure-A/7) against the order dated 30th January 2001 passed by the Superintendent of Post Office and prayed for reinstatement in service with all consequential benefits. The Superintendent Post Office vide order dated 8th February 2008 (Annexure-A/1) communicated the respondent that his representation dated 3rd October, 2007 was forwarded to the Circle Office from where it has been informed that punishment has been imposed as the respondent was found guilty in the departmental enquiry and, therefore, his representation is filed.

(3.) The respondent filed Original Application before the Tribunal and prayed for quashing of the order dated 8-2-2008 (Annexure-A/1) and further prayed for direction to the petitioners/respondents to consider his case for reinstatement with full back wages. The Tribunal by the impugned order allowed the application of the respondent and ordered reinstatement and quashed penalty of removal inflicted vide order dated 30th January 2001 and directed reinstatement in service forthwith without any back wages. It has been further observed that in case there is delay beyond the period of two months, the applicant would be entitled to salary and all back wages with consequential benefits as if he was reinstated w.e.f. 21-8-2009.