S.C. SHARMA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner-applicant has sought quashing of impugned order dtd. 9/10/2018 (Annexure-P-4), vide which his prayer for grant of compassionate allowance under Rule 41 of Central Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1972, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Pension Rules, 1972') has been dismissed by respondents. Applicant-petitioner also seeks appropriate directions to respondents to comply with orders dtd. 5/1/2017 (Annexure-A-2) and 20/11/2015 (Annexure-A-3), passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Tribunal'), seeking post retiral benefits for his entire service.

(2.) The undisputed facts are that applicant-petitioner was appointed as Principal in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (hereinafter referred to as 'KVS') on 18/11/1986. He unauthorizedly absented himself from duty w.e.f. 10/3/1997 onwards and left for foreign country without obtaining no objection certificate from competent authority. Since he did not respond despite public notices dtd. 12/7/1997 and 1/2/1999, published in daily newspaper and failed to report for duty, therefore, he was dismissed from service, vide order dtd. 5/5/1999. Said order was challenged by applicant-petitioner before Tribunal in OA No. 124/HR/2001. The Tribunal, vide order dtd. 27/11/2002, directed respondents to reinstate him in service with all consequential benefits and gave liberty to KVS to initiate disciplinary proceedings against him from the stage of serving of charge-sheet. Writ petition against said order was upheld by the High Court on 21/2/2003. Consequently, applicant-petitioner was reinstated in service, vide order dtd. 13/12/2004. The KVS initiated departmental proceedings by issuing charge-sheet on 9/3/2005 on the charge of leaving the station without obtaining no objection certificate from the competent authority as well as remaining unauthorizedly absent from duty w.e.f. 10/3/1997 to 19/5/1997. He was also charge-sheeted for failing to report at his new headquarters during the period of suspension.

(3.) After inquiry, charges were proved and dismissal order was passed. The entire period of his unauthorized absence from 10/3/1997 to 27/8/2005 was treated as dies-non. Appeal against said order was rejected. Applicant-petitioner approached the Tribunal against said order, which also dismissed his application on 14/12/2010. The orders were upheld by the High Court as well as Apex Court and has become final after the dismissal of SLP on 2/1/2013. Applicant-petitioner moved application on 3/3/2014 for grant of pension on compassionate ground under Rule 41 of the Pension Rules, 1972, which was rejected, vide order dtd. 12/3/2014. Applicant-petitioner filed OA No. 60/740/2014 for granting compassionate allowance, in which order dtd. 27/5/2015 and final order dtd. 20/11/2015 was passed by Tribunal directing respondents to reconsider the case of the applicant-petitioner and pass a well reasoned speaking order. In compliance of said order, impugned order dtd. 26/11/2015 was passed, which was conveyed to applicant-petitioner, vide letter dtd. 5/4/2016. Applicant-petitioner again approached Tribunal, which again quashed the said order on 5/1/2017 directing respondents to pass fresh orders in the light of order dtd. 20/11/2015 within a period of three weeks , vide order dtd. 30/1/2017.