UNION OF INDIA Vs. P J RASTOGI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is directed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal Mumbai bench Camp at Nagpur dated June 5, 2003, whereby the Original Application filed by the respondent No. 1 came to be allowed and the 5 order impugned before the Tribunal came to be quashed and set aside including the punishment imposed on the respondent No. 1. Shri sundaram the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner while challenging the order of the 10 tribunal contends that the Tribunal could not have relied upon the Office Note dated May 15, 1996 and the assignment of duties on April 22, 1996 to consider the situation prevailing as on november 30, 1996.

(2.) BEFORE adverting to the submission made by Mr. Sundaram, if one turns to the charge-sheet itself it reads as under: "on November 30, 1996, while working in 20 rr Section during O/8 shift duty, you were instructed to look after the out going locos. Although Loco No. 20681 was to go with train No. 1391 as per link, you did not test the loco and keep it ready in time. You gave the said loco for TFR checking at 05. 15 hours - thus it was late. Even after that, you did not make efforts to repeat this loco immediately. Because of this reason, the said loco was repeated at 6. 30 hours. Due to this reason, the loco could not be attached to the Link Train. You have not given any information about this incident to your senior Supervisor and officer for which you have been already given instructions. Earlier also, you have been given warning and charge-sheet on many occasions regarding your work, but there is no improvement in your working. This shows your negligence and carelessness towards your duties.

(3.) THE opening part of the charge-sheet states that on November 30, 1996 while the respondent was working in RR Section during o/8 shift duty he was instructed to look after out going locos. The charge neither says that the duty entrusted to the respondent No. 1 was in addition to the duty which he was looking after nor does it specify as to whether the instructions were oral or written.