UNION OF INDIA Vs. MAGANBHAI P PARMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Mr Mrugan Purohit, learned counsel for the petitioners and Mr. K. R. Dave, learned counsel for the respondent. Special Civil Application No.9397 of 2007 has been filed by petitioners challenging the order dated 22.12.2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in Original Application No.655 of 2006 by which the application of the respondent was allowed and directed reinstatement of the respondent with all consequential benefits. Special Civil Application No.9422 of 2007 has been filed by the petitioners challenging the order dated 27.11.2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in Original Application No.224 of 2006 by which the application of the respondent was allowed and the period from 20.4.2004 to 8.6.2005 was directed to be treated as period spent on duty.

(2.) THE facts of the case in brief are as under:

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the observations made by the Tribunal in Original Application No.189 of 2004 were not required to be perused by the Tribunal again since the Tribunal itself has directed the Review Committee to decide the case of the respondent afresh after perusing the service record of the respondent and since the Review Committee has taken a decision afresh after perusing the entire service record of the respondent, the observations made in para 2 of the order dated 22.12.2006 which is reproduction of earlier paragraphs of decisions in O.A. No.189 of 2004, are not at all relevant in the present case. Learned counsel has also submitted that the Tribunal has reproduced some portion of the minutes of the Review Committee meeting held on 23.6.2005 in para 3 of its order (Annexure 'A') and observed that the agenda note or the summarized statement placed before the Committee is neither available in this file nor is produced with the reply. These observations show that the Tribunal wanted details of intra -departmental correspondences and confidential reports of the respondent which are not permitted in a court case. It is further submitted that the Tribunal is not sitting in appeal over the decision of the Review Committee consisting of highest officers of the petitioner department. The learned counsel, has then submitted that if the service records of the respondent is perused, it is clear that he was involved in the offences which is of serious nature and in view of the decision taken by the Review Committee, the respondent is required to be retired prematurely with immediate effect in the public interest and accordingly the order issued by the petitioners department is just and proper. He has further submitted that the Tribunal has erred in holding that the petitioner has imposed major penalty of pay reduction of 4 stages for a period of 30 months in a case of theft of NSCs and getting loan on bogus NSCs by the respondent. As such the Review Committee has perused the entire service records of the respondent and the said fact is reflected in the decision dated 23.6.2005 and, therefore, the Tribunal ought not to have observed that the decision of the Review Committee was without any basis and nothing was produced before it. If the authority imposed penalty on the respondent for committing wrong, then the decision taken by the Review Committee without prejudice to the submissions made by either of the parties, it would not be fair to say that the Review Committee has taken the said decision without perusing the material. He has vehemently submitted that in the year 2004 the first Review Committee which took the decision consisted of Post Master General, Vadodara and Director of Postal services, Vadodara whereas the second Review Committee consisted of Chief Post Master General, Gujarat Circle and the Director of Postal Services, Ahmedabad. So the second Review Committee was consisting of highest officers of the Circle and, therefore, the decision taken by the said Committee is not prejudiced by the decision taken by earlier Review Committee.