UNION OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Gopal Krishan Sharma-respondent No. 2 herein was implicated in a case for the offence punishable under Section 3 of Railway Property (Unlawful Possession) Act, 1966 some where in the month of September, 1993. By the order dated 22nd September, 1993, he was suspended. The suspension order was revoked on 4th November, 1993. He retired on superannuation as Shop Superintendent (planning) on 31st December, 1993. Since he was implicated in a criminal case and that case was pending before the Court of Special Judicial Magistrate (Railways) Ajmer, provisionally the pension was sanctioned by the order dated 7th January, 1994. Despite his representation, he was denied regular pension and gratuity. That compelled him to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal. By its order dated 23rd June, 2000 the Central Administrative Tribunal granted the Original Application and directed that he be paid regular pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits. It is this order which is impugned in the present writ petition.

(2.) The counsel for the petitioners would urge that the Central Administrative Tribunal did not properly appreciate the provisions contained in the Railways Services (Pension) Rules, 1993, particularly Rules 9 & 10 thereof and thus, the impugned order is liable to be set-aside.

(3.) The counsel for the respondent No. 2 did not dispute that when the order dated 23rd January, 1999 denying him regular pension, gratuity and other retiral benefits came to be passed, the criminal case against the respondent No. 2 was pending. He, however, placed before us the certified coy of the order dated 28th August, 2001 passed by the Sessions Judge (Special Judge, Scheduled Caste/Scheduled Tribe), Ajmer whereby the respondent No. 2 was discharged from the criminal case. He submitted that the consideration of the matter by the Central Administrative Tribunal was proper and no interference was called for in the said order.