UNION OF INDIA Vs. DASHRATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) We have heard Sri A.K. Gaur, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri B.N. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that one Nagai, an Ex-skilled Painter (Grade-II) employed with the Railways was declared medically unfit for all category. He moved an application dated 07.11.1984 before the Competent Authority for giving appointment on compassionate ground to the respondent (Dasrath) claiming him to be his son. The Railway Authorities, thereafter, conducted an enquiry and gave compassionate appointment to respondent (Dasrath) on 10.09.1985 on the post of Temporary Khalasi. Subsequently, the respondent was also promoted to the post of Battery Truck Driver Grade-III. It transpires that Nagai also executed a registered Will deed dated 31.03.1991 regarding his property in favour of the respondent (Dashrath). Later, after the death of Nagai, one Smt. Phooleshwari Devi, on 20.12.1996, moved an application to the Railway Authorities stating that the respondent (Dashrath) is not the real son of late Nagai and that he had obtained compassionate appointment in a fraudulent manner. On the aforesaid complaint of Smt. Phooleshwari Devi, departmental proceedings were initiated. The Enquiry Officer found the charge proved and an order of removal from service was passed by the Competent Authority. This order of removal was challenged vide O.A. No. 37 of 2005 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal'), which was disposed of with a direction that the applicant may file an appeal. The respondent (Dashrath) thereafter preferred an appeal, which was rejected by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 13.05.2009. Against the order of removal from service as also the appellate order, O.A. No. 591 of 2009 was filed by the respondent (Dashrath) before the Tribunal, which was disposed of by order dated 09.12.2010. Against the order dated 09.12.2010, the petitioners herein preferred Writ Petition No. 23906 of 2011 before this Court whereas the respondent (Dashrath) filed a review petition before the Tribunal itself. The Writ Petition No. 23906 of 2011 was allowed by order dated 26.04.2011 and the order passed by the Tribunal dated 09.12.2010 was set aside and the Tribunal was directed to pass a fresh order, in accordance with law. Consequent to the decision of Writ Petition No. 23906 of 2011, the respondent got his review petition dismissed as not pressed and the matter was taken up afresh by the Tribunal. The Tribunal by the impugned order found that the enquiry proceedings against the claimant (the respondent herein) was initiated at the behest of Smt. Phooleshwari Devi, who never came forward as a witness to press her complaint during the enquiry proceedings and that no evidence was led during the enquiry proceedings to prove the charges against the claimant (the respondent herein) and from the report of the Enquiry Officer, it appeared that the Enquiry Officer himself examined claimant (the respondent herein) so as to establish the charge, even though no evidence was led against him. Accordingly, the Tribunal set aside the order of removal from service and directed the respondents to the claim-petition i.e. the petitioners herein to treat the applicant in service with full backwages and all other consequential benefits, which he was, otherwise, entitled to during his service period.

(3.) Aggrieved by the order passed by the Tribunal, the present writ petition has been filed.