HARI CHARAN SHAW Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application raises an interesting question of law as regards the period from which an order of punishment takes effect.

(2.) The petitioner is an employee of Eastern Railway Administration. On the ground of commission on certain misconduct, he was placed under suspension on January 8, 1998, which was revoked by an order dated April 20. 1999 and a disciplinary proceeding was initiated and by an order dated July 28, 1989 he was directed to be removed from services with effect from July 31, 1989 A/N. The petitioner preferred an appeal against the said order which was rejected by the Appellate Authority by an order dated October 16, 1989. Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, the petitioner filed an application before the learned Central Administrative Tribunal which was marked as O.A No. 29 or 1989. By an order dated May 4, 1994, the learned Tribunal directed the appellate authority to consider the matter afresh as the said order was not a reasoned one. Upon giving another opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, by an order dated September 11, 1994, the appellate authority set aside the order of removal and substituted the punishment imposed upon the petitioner by reducing him to the rank of shuntman-A for a period of three years with cumulative effect. As against the said order a review application was filed before the Chief Works Manager which was not entertained. Again an application in revision was filed on April 15, 1996 and the said revisional application (sic) was rejected on April 21, 1996. The petitioner preferred a mercy appeal before the General Manager, and by an order dated June 2, 1997 the General Manager passed the following order:

(3.) However, the Assistant Welfare Officer, Eastern Railway, Liluah, issued an office order on July 3, 1997 which is to the following effect: