JUDGEMENT
-
(1.) Shri B. B. S. Srivastava has filed this Original Application with the
following prayer :-
a) Direct the respondents to cancel and/or set aside the impugned
order dated 12.6.2003 and 18.2.2004 as set out in Annexure
A-6 and Annexure A-10 respectively.
b) Direct the respondents to pay the applicant gratuity money
immediately along with interest from the date of such accrual till
the date of actual payment.
c) Direct the respondents to pay the applicant actual retirement
benefits and arrear benefits, the amount of balance arrear pension
and current rate of pension from the date of his retirement till
today and so on the amount of pension alike his junior such as
Shri A. N. Seal who retired from service on April, 2004.
d) Any order and/or further order or orders as the Hon'ble Tribunal
may deem fit and proper.
(2.) The factual matrix of this case is that the applicant, while holding
the post of Junior Engineer-l in the respondent department, came to be
removed from service vide order dated 21.9.1992 for the alleged unauthorised
absence from duty since 18.1.1988. The said removal order was set aside
vide the judgement dated 12.6.2001 passed by this bench of the Tribunal in
O.A. No. 928/1998. The directions were given to regularise the services of the
applicant till the date of removal from service by granting him admissible
leave and other leave for the period of unathorised absence from 1988.
Thereafter, the applicant was reinstated in service vide order dated 12.6.2001
and posted against the post of Junior Engineer-l at Asansol. The period of
absence from 18.1.1988 to 21.9.1992 equal to 1709 days has been sanctioned
as leave without pay by the competent authority vide order dated 16.10.2001
at Annexure A/4.
(3.) The further facts of the case are that during the intervening period,
since the applicant was removed from service, no salary was paid, the normal
rent of the Government accommodation was not deducted, although he
continued to hold the resident during the said period. It is also averred that
in view of his reinstatement in service and after setting aside the disciplinary
proceedings as well as removal order, he became entitled to stay in Railway
quarter in which he was staying after the reinstatement of service. Further on
his reinstatement, he is deemed to be in continuous service. The Railway
Authorities should have deducted the normal rent of the said period since the
quarter was duly allotted to him, which has not been cancelled. The impugned
order dated 12.6.2003 has been passed on his appeal stating therein that the
applicant was removed from service and the holding of the accommodation
was unauthorised. Even on reinstatement the intervening period has not been
treated as duty. Hence he cannot claim for the retention of quarter. His total
amount of gratuity has been withheld. His junior is getting a higher amount
of pension than the applicant. The Original Application has been filed on
number of grounds mentioned in para 5 and its sub paras, which shall be
dealt with in later part of this order.;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.