UNION OF INDIA Vs. ROSHAN LAL MADHOK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 28.7.2000, Annexure-3 to the writ petition.

(2.) We have heard learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) The respondent No. 1 filed a claim petition before the Tribunal alleging that he was working as Loco Cleaner under Loco Foreman and was granted casual leave for certain urgent work from 26.4.1972 to 2.5.1972, i.e., for seven days with station leave permission. Thereafter he has alleged that he fell 111 and remained absent for about seventeen years, i.e., from 3.5.1972 to 28.2.1989. The respondent alleged that he became fit on 28.2.1989 and reported for duty before Loco Foreman, Northern Railway, Laksar on 1.3.1989, who directed him to report to Divisional Railway Manager, Moradabad and produce his appointment letter. However, the respondent No. 1 failed to produce his appointment letter. There was no record available with the railway administration about the appointment and working of respondent No. 1 in 'the railway, nor did the respondent No. 1 file any satisfactory report to the railway that he ever worked in the railway.