UNION OF INDIA Vs. K.K. KAMTARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution the petitioners have challenged the order dated 29.10.2003 of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench in Gwalior in OA No. 371/2001.

(2.) THE facts briefly are that the respondent was working as a Senior Goods Guard in the Railways. He remained absent from duties from 7.12.1996 to 31.12.1996. Disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the respondent for unauthorised absence from 7.12.1996 to 31.12.1996. The respondent pleaded in the disciplinary proceedings that he was suffering from Malaria fever and, therefore, he could not report to duty during the aforesaid period. The Senior Divisional Operations Manager, Central Railway, Bhopal (the disciplinary authority), after going through the findings of the Enquiry Officer, recorded evidence, documents available and the defence of the respondent, held in his order dated 10.5.1999 that the respondent was guilty of serious misconduct and was guilty of carelessness and lack of devotion to duty and that he has violated rules 3.1(i), (ii) and (iii) of the Railway Service Conduct Rules, 1966, and imposed the penalty of removal from service on the respondent w.e.f. 15.5.1999. Thereafter, the respondent filed appeal before the appellate Authority and the appellate Authority reduced the penalty of removal from service to that of compulsory retirement by order dated 13.8.1999. The respondent then filed a revision and the revisional authority, namely, the Chief Operating Manager, by his order dated 28.4.2000 reduced the penalty from compulsory retirement to that of reduction from the post of Sr. Goods Guard, Grade Rs. 5000 -8000 (RSRP) to Goods Guard, Grade Rs. 4500 -7000, fixing the pay at Rs.4,500/ - for a period of three years within cumulative effect. By the said order dated 28.4.2000, the revisional authority also directed that the intervening period from the date of removal to that of rejoining Railway service shall be treated as Leave Without Pay. Aggrieved, the respondent filed the aforesaid OA before the Central Administrative Tribunal and by order dated 29.10.2003 the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur, Bench in Gwalior, quashed the punishment imposed by the revisional authority and directed that the appellant would be entitled to all consequential benefits and remanded the matter back to the revisional authority to impose an appropriate punishment.

(3.) MR . Rakesh Parashar, learned counsel appearing for the respondent, on the other hand relied on paras 5 to 8 of the impugned order of the Tribunal and submitted that the respondent was ill on account of malaria and he had also sent a communication by post and had produced as proof the certificate of posting of the said communication before the Tribunal in the OA and, hence, the Tribunal has rightly recorded the findings that the respondent was absent on account of his severe illness, which was covered by medical record and the period of absence cannot be treated as wilful or unauthorised.