TUKI RAM Vs. UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule DB. This writ petition is taken up for final hearing with the consent of the learned counsel for the parties. This writ petition challenges the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the "CAT") dated 10th December, 2002. The petitioner Tuki Ram, who at the relevant time was working as a Constable in Delhi Police, was accused of demanding an illegal gratification of Rs.200/- in respect of a quarrel between neighbours reported to the police which was amicably settled between the complainant and the complaint against. Nevertheless, the allegation was that the petitioner demanded and secured illegal gratification of Rs.200/-. The Enquiry Report is based on interalia the testimony of PW1 Prem Lata, from whom the gratification of Rs.200/- was demanded, and her father PW2 Sunder Lal. The CAT has held that there was some evidence against the petitioner and accordingly it was not open to the CAT to re-appreciate the evidence in O.A. proceedings.

(2.) The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the present case is a case of 'no evidence'. Having perused pages 32 and 33 of the writ petition which disclose the testimony of PW1 and PW2, we are satisfied that this is not a case of 'no evidence' and the action against the petitioner is based on the testimony of aforesaid two PWs.

(3.) Since the Tribunal has dealt with the evidence, non-re-appreciation of the evidence by the CAT is no ground to interfere with the order of the CAT under Article 226 of the Constitution by this Court, particularly, when we have perused the pages 32 and 33 of the writ petition to find that there was testimony of PWs 1 and 2 against the petitioner.