NAVENDRA KUMAR Vs. M T N L

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29th October, 2009 passed in T.A No.228/2009 titled Sh.Navendra Kumar v. M/s.Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) declining the claim of the petitioner for grant of full pension and gratuity during the pendency of the departmental proceedings, however, directing respondent to release other post retirement benefit other than gratuity and pension to the petitioner within two months from the date of the receipt of the copy of the order dated 29th October, 2009.

(2.) The petitioner approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi after his retirement from Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Limited (MTNL) on 28th February, 2006 claiming full and final pension instead of provisional pension contending inter-alia that he was permanently absorbed in MTNL on 1st October, 2000 and, therefore, he had retired from the Government on 1st October, 2000 and in the circumstances the memorandum of charge could not be issued against him for his alleged misconduct when he was with the Government. The petitioner also re-agitated that the disciplinary proceedings could not be initiated against him by the MTNL for the alleged misconduct committed when he was in the Government service. These pleas of the petitioner were repelled by the Tribunal on the basis of the decision of the High Court in LPA No.1971/2006 decided on 1st October, 2007 holding that MTNL/respondent was justified in initiating disciplinary action against the petitioner under Rule 5(43) of MTNL (Conduct, Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1998. Rule 5(43) of MTNL (Conduct, Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1998 is as under:-

(3.) While repelling the contention of the petitioner it was also noticed that the entire contract of service in relation to the petitioner was taken over by the MTNL respondent on the date of his absorption on 1st October, 2000.