Allahabad High Court
Rohit Kumar Sharma And 20 Others vs The Union Of India And 2 Others on 6 September, 2021
Bench: Kaushal Jayendra Thaker, Subhash Chand
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?A.F.R.
Court No. - 37
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 10910 of 2021
Petitioner :- Rohit Kumar Sharma And 20 Others
Respondent :- The Union Of India And 2 Others
Counsel for Petitioner :- Sanjay Yadav,Radha Kant Ojha (Senior Adv)
Counsel for Respondent :- Vivek Kumar Rai
Hon'ble Dr. Kaushal Jayendra Thaker,J.
Hon'ble Subhash Chand,J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. In the morning, we have been conveyed by Shri Vivek Kumar Rai, learned counsel for respondents that Central Administrative Tribunal order rather judgment is under challenge and petitioners are directed to approach the authorities as per the impugned order and have also directed him to seek instructions as we are convinced that the issue can be resolved by the present petitioner who are before this Court to approach the authorities concerned.
3. From the authorities concerned that the impugned order dated 11.8.2020 as indicated is fact in notice though it is understood by employees and the tribunal order of recovery. We, at this juncture, substitute the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Branch, Allahabad dated 2nd March, 2021 that this writ petition would be considered by the authorities concerned as a reply/representation quo. The order/notice dated 11.8.2020 and 25.8.2020, the copy of which is annexed as Annexure-2 to the writ petition.
4. We are not going into the factual matrix nor discussing the details but we are pained to note that the Central Administrative Tribunal have gone much beyond the scope and, therefore, we are required to set aside all the reasoning given by it more particularly in paras '26'-'131'. The tribunal had directed the petitioners to approach the authorities and observed against the petitioners which has made them approach this Court. The order dated 23.2.2021 is quashed. The impugned orders dated 11.8.2020 and 25.8.2020 will be considered to be noticed and not deduction of salary without hearing the parties. There cannot be any deductions, The tribunal could have simply remanded the matter as the Loco-pilot who were before it were already relegated to the concerned authority by its order. The respondents shall not re-fix the pay scale of the petitioners till decide the representations and also considered the matter on merits.
5. May that as it may be as a model Government, the respondent No.1, Union of India through the General Manager, North Central Railway will direct the respondent No.2, Divisional Railway Manager, North Central Railway, Jhansi-U.P. will in term directed respondent No.3, Divisional Railway Manager (Personnel), North Central Railway Manager, Jhansi to look into the grievance of the petitioners herein and till they decide the representation, if it is shown that there was not fraud committed cannot be deducted. May that as it may be, we substitute the tribunals order by this order.
6. This petition and O.A. will be considered to be reply of the petitioners and other affected parties may also file their representations within four weeks from today. The petitioners may supplement the same also with additional material if they so chose.
7. The judgment in WRIT - A No. - 6083 of 2021, Ramesh Chandra Raikwar And 14 Others v. Central Administrative Tribunal And 3 Others is not countenanced at present by us practical view and, therefore, we do not place reliance on the same. There are factual data also which are different from the judgment of Ramesh Chandra (Supra) for which we are not delving at the present.
8. We hope that the authorities concerned will go through the judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court regarding recovery from salary.
9. With these observations, this petition is disposed of.
10. We are thankful to counsels for ably assisting us and in case of difficulty, the parties to seek revival of this petition
Order Date :- 6.9.2021
A.N. Mishra
