UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Vs. VASUDEO REGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Since learned counsel for the respondent urges that on the merits of the enquiry report submitted against the respondent the Tribunal has not considered the same and the matter is being remanded to the Central Administrative Tribunal, we note the relevant facts justifying setting aside of the impugned order dated 23rd February, 2015 and remanding OA No.543/2011 before the Central Administrative Tribunal for adjudication afresh on merits as per law.

(2.) The respondent is an employee of the Union of India. A Tempo bearing registration No.RJ-06-TC-0126 owned by him was intercepted on 6.6.2005. 25 bags of poppy straw and poppy husks were seized. The driver and the cleaner ran away. The respondent was arrested by Neemach police. He was placed under suspension with effect from the date of his arrest. At the trial under NPDS Act before the Special Judge the respondent was convicted and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years. Based on the conviction, proceeding under Rule 19 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 an order was passed on 16.6.2008 compulsorily retiring the respondent from service. Appeal filed by the respondent against his conviction under the NDPS Act was allowed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on 20.1.2010. On 8.2010 he submitted an application for reinstatement in service. On 14.2010 the order of compulsory retirement was set aside.

(3.) On 21.4.2014 a charge sheet was served upon the respondent and the problem lies in the fact that reference was made in the charge-sheet of it being issued under sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the Rules of 1965. Sub-rule (4) of Rule 10 of the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 reads as under:-