- (1.) THE present writ petition has been preferred to quash the appellate order dated 29.11.2002, passed by the Regional Labour, Commissioner (C), Dhanbad, in P.G. Appeal/(48)/2002, whereby and whereunder, the appeal of the writ petitioner was dismissed. Petitioner has also prayed for quashing the findings of the Controlling Authority dated 26.6.2002 under the Payment of Gratuity Act in Application No. 36/19/2001 -E.6, whereby, a direction was issued to the petitioner -Management to pay the gratuity amounting to Rs. 3,50,000/alongwith 10% interest with effect from 31.1.2001.
(2.) THE fact, in brief, as submitted by the petitioner -Management, is set out as under: It is submitted that respondent no. 3 while posted as Deputy Chief Engineer committed misconduct of fraud and dishonesty during the period 1989 -91, as a result of which investigation was carried out by the Central Bureau of Investigation and necessary follow up actions were taken against him. The petitioner -Management had issued charge -sheet on 21.12.1992 and a departmental proceeding was initiated. However, the same was kept pending due to C.B.I. investigation and prosecution. During pendency of the charge memo/departmental proceeding, respondent no. 3 attained the age of superannuation and retired with effect from 1.2.2001. Respondent No. 3 is governed under the Coal India Ltd. Conduct Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978 being an Executive and it is submitted that as per paragraph 34.2 the departmental proceeding is deemed to continue even after retirement. Para 34.2 of the Rules is quoted as under: - "34.2 Departmental proceeding, if instituted while the employee was in service whether before his retirement or during his reemployment, shall, after the final retirement of the employee, be deemed to be proceeding and shall be continued and concluded by the Authority by which it was commenced in the same manner as if the employee had continued in service." Paras 27.0 and 27.1 of the Conduct Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978 deal with both minor as well as major punishment, As per charge memo respondent no. 3 had requisitioned three Air Conditioner Machines for installation in the U.H.F. Telecom room and after taking delivery through his representative vide Gate Pass No. 43709 on 12.1.1991 got the same transported through Truck No. BPW2672. Out of the aforesaid three A.C. Machines, one he got it installed at his own residence and the other two A.C. Machines were traceless, causing loss to the Company of more than Rs. 52,000/ -.
(3.) THE main contention raised by the counsel for the petitioner is that in view of specific provision, governing an Executive under the Conduct, Discipline and Appeal Rules, 1978, the petitioner -Management was justified in law in continuing with the departmental proceedings after retirement even though initiated while the Executive was in service.;