Ambika Ram vs The Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 4478 Patna

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
              Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.7923 of 2021
     ====================================================

Ambika Ram, aged about 74 years, son of late Mewa Ram, resident of village- Pirojpur, P.S.- Bhledi, District- Saran.

... ... Petitioner Versus

1. The Union of India through the Secretary cum D.G Department of Posts, New Delhi

2. Chief Post Master of General Bihar Circle, Patna.

3. The Post Master General Northern Region, Muzaffarpur.

4. Senior Superintendent of Post Office, Saran, Chapra.

5. Directors of Account, (Postal), Patna-800001

... ... Respondents ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sudhir Kumar Tiwary, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Verma, A.S.G. ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN

ORAL JUDGMENT

(Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE VIKASH JAIN)

Date : 06-09-2021

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the respondents through video conference.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner has filed an

undertaking that all defects pointed out by the stamp reporter

shall be removed, and compliance with the conditions of the

notices of this Court with regard to acceptance of e-filing shall be

made, without delay immediately upon resumption of normal Patna High Court CWJC No.7923 of 2021 dt.06-09-2021

physical functioning of the Court, and in any event within one

month thereof.

3. The following reliefs as formulated by the petitioner

have been claimed in the writ petition-

"(i) Issuance of an order, direction or writ in the nature of Certiorari quashing order dated 27.05.2019 passed in O.A. No. 939 of 2015 by the C.A.T. Patna Bench, Patna whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the O.A.

(ii) Issuance of an order, direction or writ in the nature of Mandamus commanding the respondents to grant the family pension to the petitioner with all consequential benefits after quashing the orders impugned.

(iii) Any other relief or reliefs to which the petitioner may be found entitled to in the facts and circumstances of the case."

4. The short facts according to the petitioner are that

while he was discharging his duties as Sub Post Master in Derni

Post Office, an occurrence took place and a sum of Rs. 2,47,323/-

was stolen away by an unknown person during the night of

27/28.06.2001 for which Derni P.S. Case No. 115 of 2001 was

instituted under Sections 461 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code.

After investigation, the police submitted charge-sheet against the

petitioner under Sections 409 and 120 B of the Indian Penal

Code. The petitioner was put under suspension pending Patna High Court CWJC No.7923 of 2021 dt.06-09-2021

departmental inquiry. In the departmental proceeding, a report

dated 21.06.2004 (Annexure-2) was submitted by the enquiry

officer to the effect that prosecution had not been able to prove

the allegations in the charge sheet. It is stated in para 8 of the

writ petition that the "petitioner has been acquitted in the

departmental proceeding." It is stated further in para 12 of the

writ petition that the petitioner "was given voluntary retirement

on 18.10.2005." In due course, the criminal trial ended in his

acquittal in terms of judgment dated 28.05.2012 (Annexure-1) as

the prosecution was not able to prove the charges levelled

against the petitioner. In view of such acquittal and the petitioner

not having received full pension, etc., a representation was filed

before the respondent no. 5 and thereafter, O.A. No. 983 of 2012

before the CAT for redressal of his grievance. The said O.A. was

disposed of on 06.12.2012 (Annexure-3) with a direction to the

respondents to decide the matter by passing a reasoned and

speaking order, which, in turn, was passed on 30.07.2014 by the

respondent no.4 (Annexure-4) observing, inter alia, that in view

of the petitioner having been compulsority retired on

18.10.2005, he had been awarded sufficient punishment and

there remained nothing against him for stopping payment of his

admissible dues.

Patna High Court CWJC No.7923 of 2021 dt.06-09-2021

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that

learned CAT has erred in dismissing the O.A. which was filed for

declaring the period of deemed suspension of the applicant from

10.07.2001 to 18.10.2005 as the period on duty for all purposes

including for consequential monetary benefits. It is submitted

that pursuant to acquittal in the criminal case, a direction was

given in O.A. No. 983 of 2012 preferred by him to pass a reasoned

and speaking order by the respondents. However, pursuant to the

order dated 30.07.2014, the respondents did not regularize the

suspension period for all purposes.

6. Learned counsel for the respondents appears and

opposes the writ petition, submitting that the petitioner was

awarded punishment by way of compulsory retirement by order

dated 18.10.2005. Pursuant to the direction of the CAT in OA No.

983 of 2012, a reasoned and speaking order was duly passed on

30.07.2014, pursuant to which the admissible dues have been

paid and have not been challenged by the petitioner. The

contention of the petitioner with regard to 'deemed suspension'

is misconceived inasmuch as he had been placed under

suspension by a separate order and as such, it was not a case of

deemed suspension at all.

7. Having heard the parties and on a consideration of

the materials on record, we find the writ petition to be Patna High Court CWJC No.7923 of 2021 dt.06-09-2021

completely devoid of merit. The petitioner has avoided bringing

several material and relevant facts on record, such as the fact of

his having been suspended by a separate order, and that he was

awarded punishment by way of compulsory retirement in the

departmental proceedings. On the contrary, he has taken the

stand that he was exonerated in the departmental proceedings. A

perusal of the impugned order of the CAT reveals these material

details which are now not denied by the petitioner. Further,

pursuant to the reasoned and speaking order (Annexure-4),

orders were passed on 30.07.2014 by which various payments

were sanctioned, such as provisional DCRG and provisional

pension @ Rs. 4333/- per month and all dues have been paid to

the applicant. The basic pension of applicant has been revised

and fixed to the tune of Rs. 6529/- in the light of 6 th CPC vide

order dated 25.02.2015 and so also commutation of pension

amounting to Rs. 1,50,148/- has been paid on 16.03.2015. The

CGEGIS and GPF have also been paid. Importantly, the CAT has

found that the applicant was not exonerated in the disciplinary

proceedings rather the memo of disagreement was served to the

applicant and upon charges being proved, the petitioner was

found guilty of the charges. A separate order was passed for

suspension of the petitioner and therefore, it cannot be said that

he was put under deemed suspension. The submission of the Patna High Court CWJC No.7923 of 2021 dt.06-09-2021

petitioner, therefore, has no leg to stand on. We find no infirmity

in the impugned order dated 27.05.2019 passed in O.A. No. 939

of 2015 by Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna.

8. The writ petition accordingly stands dismissed.

9. Office shall follow-up to ensure that all defects are

removed and compliance with the notices of this Court are made

by the petitioner within the stipulated time provided in para 2

hereinabove, failing which the matter shall be brought to the

notice of this Court.

(Vikash Jain, J)

( Anjani Kumar Sharan, J) V.K.Pandey/-

AFR/NAFR                N.A.F.R.
CAV DATE                N.A.
Uploading Date          10.09.2021
Transmission Date       N.A.