B. Amit Sthalekar, J. - (1.) The petitioner is appearing in person and is seeking quashing of the order dated 13.9.2017 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad with a consequential direction to the respondents to pay him arrears of salary for the period he was under suspension alongwith dearness allowance at the current rate and also interest and also to enhance the pensionary benefits including fixation of amount of pension, gratuity, leave encashment etc. by treating the period of suspension as treated on duty and increments for the same.
(2.) Briefly stated the case of the petitioner is that when he was posted as Librarian in the Kendriya Vidyalaya, Thawe, Gopalganj he was transferred to Kendriya Vidyalaya, Phulpur, Allahabad and was again transferred to Kendriya Vidyalaya, IDPL, Virbhadra, Rishikesh. On 30.08.1988 he was placed under suspension but was allowed to report to the office everyday and sign the attendance register. It is stated that when the departmental enquiry was not being initiated he filed Writ Petition No.11763 of 1989 seeking quashing of the order of suspension. It is also stated that during the pendency of the writ petition an order was passed by the Assistant Commissioner, Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan, Lucknow on 22.04.1991 by which the pay of the petitioner was reduced by four stages from Rs.1,750/- to Rs.1,560/- with cumulative effect for a period of two years affecting his future increment of pay also on the basis of an enquiry report dated 23.04.1990. The petitioner filed departmental appeal which was not decided. Thereafter he filed Writ Petition No.33295 of 1995 and the same was disposed of by the High Court by order dated 22.11.1995 with a direction to the respondents to decide the petitioner's departmental appeal. It is stated that the appellate authority finally passed an order dated 22.11.1995 deciding the petitioner's appeal. The petitioner then filed Writ Petition No.14175 of 1996. The writ petition was transferred to the Uttrakhand High Court, Nainital and again transferred back to the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench and numbered as T.A. No.02 of 2005. The Tribunal by its judgment and order dated 28.08.2009 passed in the T.A. No.02 of 2005 quashed the order dated 22.04.1991 of the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate order dated 18.01.1996 and remitted the matter to the appellate authority to reconsider the appeal. In pursuance of the direction of the Tribunal the appellate authority reconsidered the appeal of the petitioner and by order dated 26.11.2009 rejected the appeal upholding the penalty of reduction of pay by four stages in terms of the previous penalty order dated 22.04.1991.
(3.) The case of the petitioner before the Tribunal was that once the Tribunal while deciding T.A. No.02 of 2005 had by its judgment and order dated 28.08.2009 quashed the penalty order of the disciplinary authority dated 22.04.1991 nothing remained to be decided in the departmental appeal and therefore, the order of the appellate authority dated 26.11.2009 was a nullity. Reference was made to Rule 129 of the P & T Manual Volume-III, which provides that the appellate order replaces the punishment order, therefore, if the appellate order is set aside for procedural defects, the punishment order will also simultaneously stand quashed and in such a case, it would be necessary to initiate de novo proceedings against the concerned officer. The extract of the instructions and Rule 128 of the P & T Manual, Volume-III has been filed as Annexure-3 to the writ petition.;