S MANISEKARAN Vs. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner has filed the present writ of certiorari in calling for the records of the fourth respondent in O.A. No. 843 of 2008, dated 19.8.2009, and to quash the same. THE petitioner has also consequently prayed for reinstating him in service by issuance of appropriate directions to the 1 to 3 respondents to pay him back wages etc.

(2.) THE petitioner/applicant was working as a Parcel Porter and he unauthorised ly absented from attending duties. THErefore, the first respondent issued with a charge memo, dated 30.1.2001 alleging that he remained unauthorisedly absent from duty for the period from 22.5.2000 to 1.12.2000 without prior approval/sanction from the competent authority or following the Railway Medical Attendance Rules and thereby violated Rule 3(1)(ii) of Railway Services Conduct Rules, 1966,

(3.) FEELING aggrieved against the impugned order passed by the Fourth Respondent/Central Administrative Tribunal, the petitioner has preferred the present writ petition.