UNION OF INDIA Vs. R R NAIDU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WE have heard Ms. Reeta Chandarana, learned counsel for the petitioner. This petition has been filed challenging the order dated 9.3.2011 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in in O.A. No.140 of 2010. The facts in brief are that the respondent was working as Goods Driver with the respondents. On 16.7.2004, the respondent, while on duty, had passed danger signal which resulted into busting of Joint No.105 KKF Yard for which he was served with charge sheet dated 23.9.2004. After the DAR inquiry, as the charge was proved, penalty of compulsory retirement was inflicted on the respondent under Rule 6 of (DandA) Rules, 1968. The respondent had preferred appeal against the order before the Appellate Authority. The Appellate Authority had considered the appeal of the respondent and had modified the penalty awarded by the Disciplinary Authority and placed him in railway service on the post of Diesel Mechanic Grade III in pay scale of Rs.3050-4590 for a period of three years with cumulative effect. On 24.11.2005, the respondent had preferred revision petition against the order of the Appellate Authority. The Revisional Authority confirmed the decision of the Appellate Authority. Being aggrieved by the said order, the respondent preferred O.A. No.385 of 2006 wherein the order passed by the Revisional Authority had been quashed and the matter was remanded back to the Revisional Authority for reexamining the revision petition in light of law. The Revisional Authority had reduced the penalty imposed by the Appellate Authority of reduction as Diesel Mechanic Grade III for a period of 3 years with cumulative effect to reduction for a period of one year instead of three years without cumulative effect. The respondent had challenged the three orders passed by the Disciplinary, Appellate and Revisional authorities in O.A. No.140 of 2010 before the Central Administrative Tribunal (for short, "the Tribunal"). The Tribunal again remanded the matter to the authorities to reconsider the case within a period of three months. This order is under challenge in this Special Civil Application.

(2.) THE respondent has urged before the Tribunal that the respondent should not be reduced to the rank of Diesel Mechanic, the post which he never held. It is urged that the respondent could be reverted only to the post which he had held during his service tenure. THE Tribunal accepted the contention of the petitioner in view of the law laid down by the Honourable Apex Court holding therein that no one can be reduced in a rank as a measure of penalty to a post to which he has not been appointed on a post outside the cadre. THE Apex Court in South Bengal State Transport Corporation v. Ashok Kumar Ghosh and others (2010) 11 SCC 71, in para 20 held as under: