This order is issued in companypliance to the Orders dated 15.12.2005 of Honble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi in Original Application No.2008 of 2003.
CWP No.3354 of 1994 filed by the appellant was allowed by the learned Single Judge of the Delhi High Court vide order dated 19.9.1994 and the termination of his service was quashed.
After companysidering the same, the Commissioner, KVS passed order dated 5.11.2003 and terminated the appellants service with immediate effect.
In view of the aforesaid order of the Tribunal, the Commissioner companysidered the appellants representation and passed order dated 20/24.01.2006 whereby he again terminated the appellants service with immediate effect under Article 81 b of the Education Code and directed that the amount payable to him in terms of the Tribunals order and 3 months pay and allowances in lieu of numberice be paid to him immediately.
He also filed a miscellaneous application for stay of order dated 5.11.2003 passed by the Commissioner, KVS for termination of his service.
After companysidering the Enquiry Report, the Commissioner issued memorandum dated 31.3.2003 proposing to pass final order under Article 81 b of the Education Code and gave opportunity to the appellant to make representation in the companytext of the findings recorded against him.
The appellant submitted detailed representation dated 15.4.2003 to companytest the findings recorded in the Enquiry Report.
550/2000 which was disposed of by the learned Single Judge of the High Court vide order dated 25.1.2001, the relevant portion of which is reproduced below In this case judgment of the learned Single Judge has merged in the judgment passed in LPA.
The appellant challenged the order of termination as well as the appellate order in OA No.
The same was the fate of review petition filed by him before the High Court and SLP C Nos.8219 8220/2010 filed before this Court.
By an order dated 29.12.2003, the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal for short, the Tribunal stayed the operation of order dated 5.11.2003.
Since the appellant was number given companysequential benefits, he filed Contempt Petition No.
In case there is number companypliance of order of Division Bench then petitioner is at liberty to file a fresh petition.
During this period, respondent will be deemed to be in service and petitioner shall pay 50 of his salaries subject to the outcome of the OA.
The operative portion of that order reads as under In the result I allow the writ petition, quash the order of dismissal dated February 11, 1988 and direct that the petitioner shall be reinstated in service forthwith with all companysequential benefits from the date of his dismissal.
Thereafter, the Commissioner, KVS passed order dated 3.10.2000 for reinstatement of the appellant with a stipulation that the period during which he had number worked, i.e., from 11.2.1988 to the date of joining the duty shall be treated as dies non.
The Commissioner, KVS challenged that order in WP C No.
OA No.2008/2003 was finally disposed of by the Tribunal vide order dated 15.12.2005 and a direction was issued to the Commissioner, KVS to pass fresh order after companysidering the representation made by the appellant and keeping in view his forthcoming superannuation with effect from 31.12.2005.
3141/2004, which was disposed of by the Division Bench of the High Court vide order dated 16.8.2004, the substantive portion of which reads as under Petition is disposed of by providing that the termination order passed against the petitioner shall remain in abeyance for two months from this period.
151/2001.
With the above observations, the application and petition stand disposed of.
Tribunal is directed to dispose of the OA of the respondent expeditiously.
The appellant challenged memorandum dated 31.3.2003 by filing an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, which was registered as OA No.2008/2003.
The operative portion of that order reads as under Considering the gravity of the proven immoral behaviour towards girl students, I hereby terminate the services of Shri R.S. Misra with immediate effect pursuant to the provisions of Article 81 b of Education Code for Kendriya Vidyalaya.
Thereupon, he filed Contempt Petition No.
Having failed to companyvince the Tribunal, the High Court and this Court to quash the termination of his service, the appellant filed Civil Miscellaneous Application No.
In the meanwhile, the appellant was served with memorandum dated 11.3.2002 and was called upon to explain as to why disciplinary action should number be taken against him under Article 81 b of the Education Code on six allegations, three of which related to misbehaviour with girl students.
The writ petition filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court.
There is numberdispute about one aspect that the petitioner has been appointed vide annexure 2 vide order 3.10.2000 at page 33.
This will number, however be any expression of opinion on the merit of the OA or the nature of charges against the respondent.
The appellant sent legal numberice dated 20.2.2001 through his advocate for grant of companysequential benefits but the same was rejected vide letter dated 4.4.2001.
Simultaneously, it was directed that the respondents shall companytinue to pay 50 salary till the decision was taken in the matter.
Respondent will number however enter the school premises for discharge of his duties during this period in view of the nature of allegations levelled against him.
The Enquiry Officer Summary Enquiry Committee submitted report dated 9.4.2002 with the finding that allegations leveled against the appellant have been proved.
While he was holding the post of Post Graduate Teacher Chemistry in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan for short, KVS , the appellants services were terminated by the Commissioner, KVS under Article 81 b of the Education Code.
S. Singhvi, J. This appeal is directed against order dated 5.2.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court whereby the civil miscellaneous application filed by the appellant in Writ Petition No.3902/2008 for issue of a direction to the respondents to pay him salary for the period between 5.11.2003 and 24.1.2006 was dismissed.
