UNION OF INDIA Vs. V.SELVAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Writ Petition arises out of Ext.P17 order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench dated 6.7.2007, an Original Application filed by the respondent herein seeking an order to quash Annexures A1, A2 and A3 orders and to direct the petitioners herein to grant him all consequential benefits including arrears of pay and allowances as if Annexures A1, A2 and A3 had not been issued at all.

(2.) In O.A.No.682/2005, a copy of which has been marked as Ext.P13 in this Writ Petition, the petitioners herein (hereinafter referred to as the petitioners) filed Ext.P14 reply statement opposing the relief sought for in that O.A., contending that the orders impugned are perfectly legal and no interference of the Tribunal is warranted. On receipt of Ext.P14 reply statement, the respondents herein (hereinafter referred to as the 'applicant') filed Ext.P15 rejoinder reiterating the contentions raised in the O.A., which was followed by Ext.P16 reply filed by the petitioners.

(3.) After considering the pleadings and materials on record, the Tribunal by Ext.P17 order dated 6.7.2007 set aside the impugned orders on a finding that the applicant was not given an opportunity as contemplated under Rule 9(21) of the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968 (hereinafter referred to as 'the D&A Rules'). After referring to the law laid down by the Apex Court in Ministry of Finance v. S.B.Ramesh (1998 (3) SCC 227) the Tribunal concluded that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the applicant is vitiated in view of non -compliance of the mandate under Rule 9(21). Though the Tribunal set aside the impugned orders on procedural irregularities, instead of remitting back the case to the Disciplinary Authority to continue the enquiry proceedings from that stage; the Tribunal, taking note of the fact that the applicant would have undergone the penalty already awarded and that, since it is almost seven years that the alleged incident had taken place, coupled with the fact that the he has been medically decategorised and as such he cannot be placed back to the post of Diesel Assistant, directed the petitioners to consider the positioning of the applicant in the post to which he was found medically fit vide order dated 21.10.2000 and to treat him to have held that post continuously, but notionally. The Tribunal has also ordered that the said period shall count for seniority and promotion and that, necessary orders in this regard be passed within three months from the date of communication of the order. It is aggrieved by Ext.P17 order passed by the Tribunal, the petitioners are before this Court in this Writ Petition.