U.O.I. Vs. RAJESH KUMAR MEENA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule D.B. in this matter was issued on 08.09.2009.

(2.) Challenge in this writ petition is to the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the 'Tribunal') dated 105.2008 by which an OA No. 2186/2006 filed by the respondent herein was allowed as the Tribunal reached the conclusion that the departmental enquiry had not been conducted as per law, and proportionality of punishment with regard to the misconduct had not been properly examined by the disciplinary authority and the appellate authority. Consequently, a direction was issued to reinstate the respondent and his period of absence from 25.09.1999 till the date of reporting to duty be regularized and he should be treated in service being the period as spent on duty for all purposes except back-wages.

(3.) Mr.Krishna, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the order of the Tribunal is based on totally wrong appreciation of facts. It is submitted that in paragraph 9 of the impugned order, the Tribunal had noted that the applicant (respondent herein) had taken permission only for 4 days leave (from 21.09.1999 to 24.09.1999) and remained absent thereafter from 25.09.1999 without taking permission from the competent authority. The Tribunal had also noted that when the respondent turned up for duty on 31.02000 he was given duty on 04.04.2000, but once again he did not join the duty. Taking these factors into account the Tribunal observed that since the respondent did not join the duty, he continued to remain on unauthorized absence.