P. DASRATH Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition has been preferred against the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 199 of 2010(R) dated 19th July, 2013 which is annexed as Annexure 9 to the memo of petition. Application preferred by this petitioner has been dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Circuit Bench, Ranchi, whereby the order of dismissal passed by the respondents -Railway authority has been upheld.

(2.) COUNSEL for the petitioner submitted that the charge -sheet was issued to this petitioner on 22nd December, 2003 and the alleged misconduct was violation of Rule 3.1(i), (ii) and (iii) of Railway Services Condition Rules, 1966. It is alleged by the respondents -authorities that this petitioner had presented false and fabricated mark -sheets of Matriculation, Intermediate Science (Maths Honors) and Bachelor of Science. Thereafter, ex parte enquiry was conducted and without giving opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and without giving any enquiry report to this petitioner, the disciplinary authority has dismissed this petitioner from services of the respondents on 10th November, 2005, which was challenged by this petitioner in O.A. No. 199 of 2010(R) before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The said Tribunal has not properly appreciated the fact that the petitioner was in jail during the period running from 14th June, 2004 to 15th September, 2004 and during this period, the departmental proceeding was conducted. Thus, no opportunity of being heard was given to the petitioner. Moreover, the Tribunal has also not appreciated the fact that the Enquiry Officer has also not given his report to this petitioner. Moreover, the criminal case for the same very charge is also pending. These aspects of the matter have not been properly appreciated by the Central Administrative Tribunal and hence, the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 199 of 2010(R) dated 19th July, 2013 deserves to be quashed and set aside.

(3.) HAVING heard both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we see no reason to entertain this writ petition mainly for the following facts and reasons: -