RAJENDRA KUMAR PAREEK Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BRIEFLY stated the facts of the case are that a charge-sheet dated 1.2.1985 was served upon the petitioner by the respondents for major penalty as petitioner remained wilfully absent from duty from 8.2.1983 to 5.4.1985. After completion of enquiry, the disciplinary authority passed an order for removal of the petitioner from service.

(2.) LEARNED Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur vide its order dated 27.6.2000 in Original Application No.330/1986, allowed the Original Application of the petitioner in part. The impugned removal order dated 18.6.1986 was modified to the extent that the penalty of removal from service was substituted by stoppage of three grade increments without cumulative effect. Para No.24 of the order of Tribunal dated 27.4.2000 is reproduced as under :-

(3.) THE only submission made by Mr. J.K. Kaushik, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner is that despite direction by the Tribunal to regularise the absence period of petitioner from 8.2.1983 to 11.4.1985 and from the date of removal till reinstatement, the respondents are not counting the said period for the purpose of qualifying service, as required for granting pension and pensionary benefits, therefore, necessary direction be issued to the respondents to make it clear that the said period which has been ordered to be regularised by the Tribunal, has to be and should be counted for pension and pensionary benefits.