UNION OF INDIA Vs. KAILASH CHANDRA BEHERWAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This case has a chequred history. Briefly the facts are that the respondent No. 1 (Kailash Chandra Beherwal) was a Labour Enforcement Officer. A charge-sheet was issued to the respondent No. 1 on 1.12.1980 and consequently he was dismissed from service on 8.10.1982. Challenging the same, the respondent No. 1 filed an appeal, which was dismissed by the competent authority on 6.7.1984. Aggrieved by the said order, the respondent No. 1 preferred writ petition No. 5244 of 1985, which was transferred to the Central Administrative Tribunal and registered as Transfer Application No. 998 of 1986. By order dated 15.12.1987, the Tribunal allowed the Transfer Application and set aside the dismissal order of the respondent No. 1 dated 8.10.1982 leaving it open to the petitioners to hold departmental proceedings in accordance with law. Pursuant thereto on 4.1.1988 the respondent No. 1 was allowed to join his services.

(2.) Then started the second innings and within a few weeks of his reinstatement on 28.1.1988 the respondent No. 1 was placed under suspension with effect from 8.10.1982. Challenging the said order of suspension, the respondent No. 1 preferred an Original Application No. 206 of 1988 before the Tribunal, which was dismissed on 12.5.1988. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent No. 1 preferred a Special Leave Petition No. 8876 of 1988 before the Apex Court. By order dated 1.2.1989, Hon'ble Supreme Court allowed the petition filed by the respondent No. 1.

(3.) The matter did not rest at peace and third round began and on 7.4.1989, which was barely three weeks before the retirement of the respondent No. 1 (which was on 30.4.1989), he was again dismissed from service. Challenging the said order, the respondent No. 1 filed Original Application No. 278 of 1991 before the Tribunal. The said Original Application No. 278 of 1991 was allowed by the Tribunal by detailed reasoned order dated 18.10.1996. The operative portions contained in paragraphs 18 and 19 of the said order are quoted below: