CHAMARU RAM Vs. STATE OF H P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was appointed as Fitter on regular basis w.e.f. 01.01.1994. He was confirmed on 01.01.1997. He has given his date of birth at the time of regularization as 31.08.1948. A complaint was made by one Shri Krishan Chand that the actual date of birth of the petitioner was 31.08.1943 and not as 31.08.1948. Shri Krishan has substantiated his complaint with the School Leaving Certificate of the petitioner. Thereafter, the disciplinary proceedings were initiated against the petitioner under Rule 14 of the C.C.S.(C.C.&A.) Rules, 1965 on 26.12.2003. Inquiry Officer was appointed. He submitted the report to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority removed the petitioner from service w.e.f. 31.08.2001, i.e. the date of attaining the age of superannuation on the basis of actual date of birth, i.e., 31.08.1943 on 04.06.2004. PETITIONER assailed this order before the erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal by way of Original Application No. 2571 of 2004. The same was directed to be treated as representation by the learned Tribunal on 10.09.2004 to the Chief Engineer, Irrigation-Cum- Public Health Department, Central Zone, Mandi, with a further direction to decide the pending appeal. The appeal was considered by the Chief Engineer (CZ), Mandi on 17th December, 2004. The Chief Engineer agreed with the imposition of penalty by the Superintending Engineer, I.&P.H. vide his letter dated 04.06.2004. However, he ordered the period w.e.f. 01.09.2001 to 04.06.2004 to be treated as re-employment as per the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in AIR 1999 SC-705. He has also ordered that the continuance of the petitioner in service after 31.08.2001 will not confer any right on him to any service benefit for the period w.e.f. 01.09.2001 to 04.06.2004

(2.) MR. Lokender Thakur, learned counsel for the petitioner has strenuously argued that the order dated 17th December, 2004 is neither speaking nor detailed. According to him, the date of birth of his client is 31.08.1948 and not 31.08.1943.

(3.) PETITIONER has furnished a wrong information that he was illiterate at the time when he was regularized. In fact, he had passed 7th Class and as per School Leaving Certificate, his date of birth has been recorded as 31.08.1943. He has produced a false certificate from the Gram Panchayat, Baggi that his date of birth is 31.08.1948. PETITIONER has been issued a memorandum under Rule 14 of the CCS(CCA) Rule, 1965. He has been associated with the inquiry proceedings by the Inquiry Officer. The Inquiry Officer has categorically come to the conclusion on the basis of the documents placed on record, including the School Leaving Certificate and the entries recorded in the Gram Panchayat that the date of birth of the petitioner was 31.08.1943 and not 31.08.1948. It is in these circumstances that the penalty of removal was imposed upon the petitioner. However, the Appellate Authority has treated the period w.e.f. 01.09.2001 to 04.06.2004 as re-employment. The order passed by the Appellate Authority is reasoned and detailed. PETITIONER has concealed the material information from the department at the time when he was regularized. He disclosed himself to be illiterate, though he had gone to School and was educated up to 7th Class. His date of birth is 31.08.1943 and not 31.08.1948. There is no illegality in the order passed by the Appellate Authority on 17.12.2004. The period w.e.f. 01.09.2001 to 04.06.2004 has rightly been treated as re-employment. In other words, the petitioner will get his retiral/pensionary benefits only up to 01.09.2001 and will not get any benefit between the period of re-employment from 01.09.2001 to 04.06.2004.