T.R. MATHURIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY means of present original application filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal's Act, 1985 the applicant impugned his termination order dated 25.2.2001 passed by Chairman, Unit Run Station, CSD Canteen, Agra Cantt (Annexure A -1) with further prayer for issuance of direction to the respondents to permit the applicant to perform his duties and pay him salary. None appeared for the parties. Being the old matter of 2001, in terms of Rule 15(1) of CAT (Procedure) Rules 1987, we proceed to decide the matter on the available pleadings on record. The facts to be noticed first. The applicant is an ex -service man who retired from Army Ordnance Corps of Indian Army on 31.8.1991. After his retirement, the applicant got himself registered at D.S.S. & A Board Agra being an ex -serviceman. On 31.8.1992, the applicant was informed by the office of D.S.S. & A Board vide their letter dated 31.8.1992 that his name has been forwarded for appointment as Manager/Assistant Manager in Station CSD Canteen Agra on 31.8.1992. The applicant was also informed by the Station Headquarter on 8.12.1992 to forward his Bio -Data and contact them on 16.12.1992. The applicant was interviewed by the Board of Officers presided by Station Commandant Agra. He was found suitable and accordingly the applicant was given appointment letter on 3.6.1993. Initially the applicant was appointed as Assistant Manager. Subsequently on retirement of Manager the applicant was promoted as officiating Manager on 1.9.1993 initially for a period of three months. Subsequently, the applicant was appointed as Manager w.e.f. 1.12.1993 vide order dated 6.12.1993. It is averred that as per appointment letter the applicant has to retire on attaining the age of 58 years which was to be completed in the year 2001. Subsequently, Standard Operating Procedure, (SCP) was framed and issued by the Station Commander, Station Headquarter, Agra on 1.11.1997 wherein it was decided to review the tenure of service of canteen employees after five years and it can be extended till the employee attained 60 years of age. It is averred that on 24.2.2001 the applicant way called in the office of Station Headquarter and was asked to either resign else his service will be terminated. Ultimately by order dated 25.2.2001, the service of the applicant has been terminated with immediate effect. He was handed over a cheque of Rs. 4,808 towards one month salary as advance, hence the original application.

(2.) PURSUANCE to notice respondents resisted the claim of the applicant by filing detailed counter affidavit. Averments made in para Nos. 11 and 12 which are relevant reads as under: -

(3.) UNDISPUTEDLY , the applicant and similarly situated persons working with the Unit Run Canteen are not getting the salary from the consolidated fund of Government of India. The judgment held in the case of Mohd. Aslam was doubted and the matter was referred to the larger Bench in case of R.R. Pillai (dead) through L.Rs. v. Commanding Officer HQ S.A.C. (U) and Ors., in Civil Appeal No. 3495 of 2005 which was decided by the Lordships' of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide their judgment dated 28.4.2009. It is held that Mohd. Aslam's (supra) was not correctly decided, the relevant part of the judgment in the case of R.R. Pillai (supra) reads as under: -