CourtKutchehry.com
Tribunals and CommissionsSingle Bench(2021) 07 CAT CK 0400

Rajesh Gupta vs Union Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi · Decided on 30 July 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
L. Narasimha Reddy, Chairman
RESULT
Allowed
CASE NUMBER
OA No.944/2014

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 354 words

The Division Bench comprising of the Hon’ble Chairman and Hon’ble Ms. Aradhana Johri, Member (A), heard the OA, and separate judgments were rendered. While allowing the OA, the Hon’ble Chairman concluded as under:

“27.

Since the order of punishment is set aside, the applicant shall be deemed to have been reinstated for the limited purpose of continuing the disciplinary proceedings. He shall be treated to be under suspension, but without subsistence allowance, till the final order is passed by the disciplinary authority in accordance with the steps indicated above. The exercise in this behalf shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Depending on the outcome of the proceedings, the manner in which the period of deemed suspension and other spells are to be treated, shall be decided by the disciplinary authority. There shall be no order as to costs.”

2.

The Hon’ble Member (A), dismissed the OA with the following observations:

“23.

On the basis of the discussion above, all three grounds of this OA have no legs to stand on and the OA deserves to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed. There shall be no order as o costs.”

3.

In view of the difference of opinion, the matter was referred to Hon’ble Shri A. K. Bishnoi, Member (A). He framed the following issued:

“a)

What is the procedure to be adopted by the Disciplinary Authority in the context of disagreeing with the findings recorded by the IO?

b)

Whether it is competent for the UPSC to undertake any discussion upon the findings recorded by the IO, while rendering its opinion; and

c)

Whether it is not incumbent upon the disciplinary Authority to record reasons with reference to the explanation submitted by the delinquent employee, before an order of punishment is passed.”,

and answered all of them in favour of the applicant. No independent directions were given. In other words, he concurred with the findings recorded by the Hon’ble Chairman.

4.

Therefore, the OA shall stand allowed with the directions contained in para 27 of the judgment of the Hon’ble Chairman.