ARUN KUMAR MISHRA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) When the matter was listed on April 22, 2021, this Court had raised an issue of maintainability of the petition before this Court. This is for the reason that the petitioner who was Chief Director (Corporation) in the Ministry of Agriculture Corporation and farmers welfare, was issued a charge sheet dated August 28, 2020 under Rule 8 of the Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972 for alleged misconduct committed by him while working as Official Liquidator of Super Bazar, the Cooperative Store Limited. In other words, the charge sheet has been issued to the petitioner as a retired employee of the Central Government and hence, the subject matter of the writ petition shall lie before the Central Administrative Tribunal.

(2.) This objection has been contested by Mr. Tushar Ranjan Mohanty, learned counsel for the petitioner by stating that the subject matter of the charge sheet is the alleged misconduct while working as an Official Liquidator and as such, he would not be amenable to the jurisdiction of the Central Administrative Tribunal. In support of his submission, Mr. Mohanty has relied upon documents related to the case of one T.C. Sivakumar, who was charge sheeted, though by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Department of Disability Affairs, but while working as Director of National Institute of Mentally Handicapped.

(3.) He stated in the case of T.C. Sivakumar the Government of India is the appointing and disciplinary authority but for all purposes, T.C. Sivakumar being Director of the National Institute of Mentally Handicapped, had filed a writ petition before this Court, titled as T.C. Sivakumar v. UOI and Ors. W.P.(C) 6318/2020 which was entertained. In support of his submission, he has drawn my attention to various documents with regard to the proceedings initiated by the Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment, Department of Disability Affairs against T.C. Sivakumar. That apart, Mr. Mohanty has also relied upon the judgment in the case of Rajendra Singh v. UOI and Ors. W.P.(C) 5304/2008 dated December 22, 2015 passed by this Court. The petitioner therein was working in the National Federation of Fishermen's Cooperatives Ltd., which according to Mr. Mohanty is not notified under the Administrative Tribunal Act and as such is not amenable to the jurisdiction of Central Administrative Tribunal and the petition filed by him was rightly entertained by this Court. Further, in support of his submission that this Court has the jurisdiction to entertain the present petition, he has also stated that the petitioner was being paid remuneration in the sum of Rs.50,000/- per month by the Super Bazar only after his superannuation from government service and not by the respondents and therefore, if at all it is Super Bazar which could have raised an issue against the petitioner. He also stated that the appointing authority of the Official Liquidator is the Central Registrar of the Cooperative Societies under the Multi State Co-operative Societies Act, 2002, therefore the Department of Consumer Affairs under the Ministry of Consumer Affairs, Food and Public Distribution is not even concerned with the issue at all.