UNION OF INDIA Vs. N SURYA RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Vide the present petition, petitioners have challenged order dated 01.12.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad, in O.A.No.231 of 2013.

(2.) Case of respondent herein is that he was appointed as Gramin Dak Sevak at Kalavalapalli Branch Office in West Godavari District on 04.06.1981. He fell sick with multiple ailments due to various domestic problems. Hence, he could not attend duty from 21.02005 till 09.10.2007 for a period of 958 days. During the entire period, he was undergoing medical treatment and medical certificates were produced from time to time. When he represented to the 4th petitioner to take him back to duty duly explaining the reasons for his absence, he was reinstated on 10.10.2007. Ever since, he was working without any blemish. However, after the lapse of three years, the petitioners issued a charge memo alleging unauthorized absence from duty for a period of 959 days from 21.02005 to 10.10.2007.

(3.) Further case of the respondent is that the charges pertain to the very same period which had been condoned while taking him back to duty after considering his representation and medical certificates and after exonerating him from the lapses. During the relevant period of absence, no show-cause- notice or charge memorandum was issued. Thus, charge memorandum dated 27.07.2010 was issued after a lapse of three years. Thereupon, an enquiry was conducted and the Enquiry Officer found the charges proved. Based upon the enquiry report, the 4th petitioner imposed penalty of removal with immediate effect vide order dated 22.02.2011. Aggrieved by the same, the respondent submitted an appeal to the 3rd petitioner and same was dismissed. Challenging the same, the respondent filed O.A.No.231 of 2013 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, and same was allowed vide order dated 01.12.2017.