R. SENTHIL KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant in the original application is the petitioner herein. Challenge in the writ petition is to the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chenna in O.A.No.310/00690/2017 dtd. 28/2/2020, in and by which the Tribunal has dismissed the original application upholding the order of punishment of removal from service passed by the disciplinary authority, as confirmed by the appellate as well as revisional authority.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are as follows:

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that on 6/12/2004, the petitioner was issued with the first charge memo dtd. 24/9/2001 for which he submitted his explanation dtd. 6/10/2004 and the said charge memo was dropped on account of administrative reasons. Again on 6/12/2004, the petitioner was issued with the same charge memo for the very same charges and though the said fact was brought to the notice of the Tribunal, it was not considered and therefore, the impugned order of the Tribunal is perverse. It is further contended that the Appellate Authority as well as the Revisional Authority, without any independent application of mind, has simply confirmed the order of the Disciplinary Authority by non-speaking orders and therefore, the impugned orders of the respondents as well as the order of the Tribunal are liable to be set aside.