UNION OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition has been filed against the judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 5.2.2003, by which the claim of the respondent employee has been allowed and the recovery notice against him has been quashed.

(2.) Facts and circumstances giving rise to this case are that respondent No. 2 Shri Raj Bahadur was the employee of the Railways. He retired on 10.5.1995, though he reached the age of superannuation in 1992. His retiral benefits had been calculated as stood retired in 1995. The Railways passed the order of making recovery and to make further adjustments in his pension. The said order was challenged and the learned Tribunal has allowed his petition partly to the extent that administration shall not recover the amount already paid but he would be deemed to have retired on reaching the age of superannuation as per the rules. Hence, this petition.

(3.) Sri Tarun Verma, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that if the employee had been permitted to work for a period of about 3 years even after reaching the age of superannuation, the order of the Tribunal cannot be justified, as it so occurred by the mischief played by the employee for which he cannot be rewarded and the order of the Tribunal runs counter to the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, thus the judgment is liable to be set aside.