- (1.) WE have heard Shri A.K. Gaur, learned counsel appearing for the Railways. Shri S.N. Ali appears for applicant-respondent No. 1.
(2.) THE petitioners-Union of India through General Manager, Central Railway with headquarters at Jhansi and its other officers are aggrieved by the judgment of the Central Administrative Tribunal dated 1st February, 2006 in Original Application No. 312 of 1999, Masjood Ali v. Union of India, by Shri K.B.S. Rajan, Member (J) for the Tribunal. The facts of this case are that on 20.11.1997 the train No. 2779 Dn. Goa Express driving Shri Masjood Ali, Driver 'A' Grade was involved in an accident in which it collided with 4005 Dn. from behind resulting in injuries to 5 passengers and serious injuries to him in which he lost his right leg, which had to be amputated and damage to the engine. The railways initiated major penalty proceedings against him under Rule 9 of the Railway Servant (Discipline and Appeal) Rules. On the basis of his admission vide his letter dated 22.5.1998, the petitioner was given punishment of compulsory retirement by order dated 1.6.1998, without conduct disciplinary enquiry. The petitioner had vide his representation dated 25.5.1998 before the punishment was awarded to him requested for voluntary retirement in view of his permanent incapacity to continue in service. It is alleged that representation was not considered by the authorities, before imposing penalty of compulsory retirement. The petitioner preferred another representation dated 10.6.1998 for conversion of his compulsory retirement into voluntary retirement as requested by him prior to issuance of the order of compulsory retirement. He did not receive any response on which he filed the Original Application in Central Administrative Tribunal for quashing the order of punishment of compulsory retirement dated 1.6.1998; to allow him voluntary retirement and for compassionate appointment to his son. The petitioner-respondents contested the original application stating that since the applicant himself had admitted negligence, which caused the accident, no interference should be made with the punishment order.
(3.) ON 22.2.2008 the writ petition was partly allowed as follows:- "This writ petition has been filed for quashing the impugned judgment and order dated 1st February, 2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad, partly while accepting the case of the present petitioner i.e. Railway Administration that the respondent No1 has rightly been given the punishment of compulsory retirement but further directed to give the appointment on compassionate ground to his son on humanitarian consideration. List revised. None appeared for the respondents. We have heard Sri Amit Sthalekar, learned counsel for the petitioners and have perused the records. Learned Tribunal while concluding the judgment has categorically held that the department was legally justified in giving the compulsory retirement to the said employee. Therefore, after reaching the said conclusion, there was no occasion for the learned tribunal to issue any other direction, and the direction so issued by the tribunal in para 7 of the judgment i.e. providing appointment to the son of the employee on compassionate ground cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and is set aside. However, it is clarified that the petitioner-respondent shall be entitled for all retiral benefits which are permissible to him in accordance with law. Subject to the observations made above, petition succeeds and allowed to the said extent." An application for recalling the order dated 22.2.2008 was filed by the respondent giving reasons for non-appearance. The application was allowed by the Division Bench of this Court on 28.1.2011 with following order: "Heard learned counsel for the parties. Cause shown for non-appearing before the Court on 22nd February, 2008 is sufficient. The order dated 22nd February, 2008 allowing the writ petition ex parte is hereby recalled. The writ petition is hereby restored to its original position. It shall not be treated as part-heard to this Bench. The order stand released for listing before a regular Bench." ;