- (1.) This order shall dispose of C.W.P. Nos.4158-CAT of 2005 and 8521-CAT of 2005 as both the writ petitions have arisen out of order dated 20.5.2004 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal) in O.A. No. 762PB of 2003 vide which disengaging/terminating the services of respondent No.1 has been quashed with a liberty to the department to pass a fresh order in accordance with the observations made by the High Court. Additionally, in Civil Writ Petition No. 8521-CAT of 2005, the order dated 6.12.2004 vide which the review petition filed by the Passport Officer, Ministry of External Affairs, Jivan Parkash Building, Model Town, Jalandhar was dismissed, has also been challenged.
(2.) Case of the applicant-Rajinder Kumar (casual labourer) as stated in O.A. No. 762-PB of 2003 in brief is that his name was sponsored by Employment Exchange, Jalandhar and he was selected and inducted by the Office of respondent No.3-Passport Officer, Jalandhar as casual labourer along with others. Applicant-Rajinder Kumar had been performing his duties and responsibilities since September, 1991 till impugned order dated 5.6.2003 was passed by respondent No.3. The Scheme formulated by the Government of India came into force with effect from 1.9.1993. In terms of para 4 of the Scheme, temporary status was conferred on the applicant and 36 other employees' with effect from 1.9.1993 vide order No. 2(3) 94-POJ/Admn. dated 24.5.1994. The name of the applicant appeared at serial No.31. Mr. Makhan Singh, who had worked in the Office from 30.5.1991 to 30.9.1991, a terminated employee was confident of Mr. I.N. Chadha, the then Passport Officer,Jalandhar and he involved applicant and several others in a false criminal case. Due to this reason, applicant was arrested on 5.7.1995 and was released on bail on 29.9.1995. Applicant filed O.A. No. 458/PB/1996 before the Tribunal as other casual labourers had been allowed to join duties who were also involved in criminal case. The said application was allowed and applicant was allowed to join duty. Mr.Shekhar Kumar filed O.A. No. 740-PB2002 challenging his termination vide order dated 9.7.2002 on account of registration of criminal case against him and the said application was dismissed by the Tribunal. Thereafter, he filed Civil Writ Petition No. 9743-CAT of 2003 and the same was allowed by the High Court on 8.7.2003 and the termination order passed by respondent No.3 was quashed. Mr. Shekhar Kumar was not allowed to join duty despite the fact that the writ petition filed by him was allowed. Applicant filed O.A. No. 1312/PB/1997 challenging the order vide which he was not allowed to join duty.
(3.) Vide its order dated 28.12.1998, the Tribunal has disposed of O.A. No. 1312/PB/1997 by quashing the order dated 12.7.1995 vide which the applicant was put off the duty and it was directed that the respondents may take steps under para 4 of the scheme, after applicant submitted his joining report. The respondents shall allow the applicant to join duty, in case, joining report was submitted by the applicant and,thereafter, they could proceed further as per law. In pursuance of the said order, the applicant was ordered to join his duty on 1.4.1999 and was also allowed consequential benefits with effect from 5.7.1995. Applicant was again terminated by giving him notice in pursuance of para 7 of the scheme vide order dated 27.9.2001. The said order was challenged by the applicant by filing O.A. No. 1010-PB of 2001. The said application was dismissed by the Tribunal vide order dated 26.11.2001. Aggrieved by the said order, applicant filed CWP No. 3612-CAT of 2002 before this Court. The said writ petition was allowed vide order dated 26.11.2001. The termination order was quashed and respondents were directed to grant all consequential benefits to the applicant. Applicant submitted his joining report on 24.9.2002 but he was not allowed to join duty by respondent No.3. The applicant filed COCP No. 251 of 2003 before this Court. On receipt of notice in the said contempt petition, respondent No.3 allowed the applicant to join his duty on 12.3.2003. After 13 days, a show cause notice was issued to the applicant on 25.3.2003 and the impugned termination order was passed with one month notice on 5.6.2003. Applicant was relieved from his duty on 4.7.2003. Applicant submitted a detailed reply on 21.3.2003. In addition, he also moved a representation to respondent No.3 on 21.3.2003. Hence, O.A. No. 762-PB of 2003 was filed by the applicant challenging the orders dated 5.6.2003 and 25.3.2003.;