UNION OF INDIA Vs. D APPLA SWAMY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The challenge in this petition is made to the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal passed in O.A. No.200/772/15, decided on 14.11.2017. This matter has a chequered history. The respondent employee preferred an application before the department seeking voluntary retirement. The railway administration by order dated 30.07.2009 (Annexure A/2) accepted the said application and permitted the employee to retire w.e.f. 31.07.2009. Since after voluntary retirement, retiral dues were not paid by the department, the employee preferred O.A. No.34/2013 seeking benefit of releasing the retiral dues with interest. The tribunal by order dated 11th January, 2013 disposed of the O.A. with a direction to the competent authority to settle the terminal benefits of the employee within a period of two months. Inspite of the direction of the Tribunal, the applicant's dues were not settled, because of which, the employee preferred a series of representations followed by a legal notice dated 16.10.2014 (Annexure A/6). This legal notice was replied by respondents by letter dated 08.12.2014 (Annexure A/7). It was pointed out that at the time, employee preferred the application for voluntary retirement, he had served the department for 9 months and 29 days only, whereas qualifiying service for voluntary retirement as per rules is 20 years. Hence, his application preferred for voluntary retirement is not accepted, but treated as his resignation from railway service. By treating it a case of resignation, the employee was given some amount under the head of P.F. and G.I.S. Being aggrieved, the employee preferred the second O.A. No.200/772/2015. The Tribunal decided this O.A. by order dated 31.03.2016 and directed that if applicant desires to rejoin his service and files an application in this regard, the respondent should allow him to join immediately, if there is nothing else adverse against him. The Tribunal further considered the new Pension Rules and opined that pension may probably be granted after completing 10 years' of qualifying service and thus, if applicant therein completes the required service, by adding his previous service also, he may be entitled for payment of pension.

(2.) The employer feeling aggrieved by this order of Tribunal dated 31.03.2016 filed W.P. No.12871/2016, decided on 17.01.2017. The Division Bench of this Court set aside the order of Tribunal dated 31.03.2016 and remanded the matter back before the Tribunal to re-hear the matter in accordance with law and decide it afresh within a period of 60 days. In turn, the Tribunal passed the order dated 14th November, 2017 (Annexure P/1) impugned herein.

(3.) The Tribunal set aside the order dated 08.12.2014 and directed the respondents to take appropriate action consequent upon quashing of impugned dated 08.12.2014 within a period of 60 days from the date of receipt of copy of the order.