NAU NIHAL SINGH RANA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of this writ petition brought under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner has sought setting aside of order dtd. 2/9/2016 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in Original Application No.653/2015 and has also sought grant of interest on gratuity, all retirement benefits and leave encashment etc. On the basis of advance notice, respondents entered appearance through counsel.

(2.) Briefly stated, circumstances relevant for present purposes are as follows.

(3.) During final arguments, learned senior counsel for petitioner took us through the above record and contended that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law. It was argued by learned senior counsel for petitioner that view of the learned Tribunal not placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.K. Dua vs. State of Haryana, (2008) 3 SCC 44 was not legally sound. Learned senior counsel also took us through records to show that the petitioner was exonerated of not just the punishment imposed by the Appellate Authority but the one imposed by the Disciplinary Authority also, and it cannot be treated to be exoneration on technical grounds. Learned senior counsel for petitioner also argued that the doctrine of res judicata invoked in the impugned order by the learned Tribunal does not come into play in cases of the present nature.