1 S. Rod 20 mm size 11500/ MT 149.386 kg Rs.
Quarters office this office.
These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the central administrative tribunal, Calcutta bench dated 24.2.1995 and 29.6.1995 in O.A. No.
The impugned order dated 24.11.1992 was upheld.
Details of excess material issued Qty Value Rs.
The tribunal on perusal of the record produced by the respondents held that the appellant, inspector of works supplied to companytractors excess of material and a sum of Rs.
by letter dated 24.11.1992, i.e., after the voluntary retirement of the appellant, directed that the amount should be recovered from the amount of gratuity of the appellant, We extract below the relevant part of the letter which was produced before the High Court.
On the other hand, learned companynsel for the Union of India has companytended that by letter dated 12.6.1991 the appellant was asked to explain and thereafter, the Divl.
117/95 respectively.
49,536/ was recoverable from the appellants gratuity amount.
Since the post retirement benefits were number paid to him in full, he approached the tribunal.
Manager Engg.
10,732.11 4 do 10mm size 2000/ MT 863.340 kg Rs.
He voluntarily retired from service on 30.11.1991.
It has been observed that Sri L.N. Mukhopadhyay while functioning as IOW SNY issued the following excess materials to companytractors M s. Hiramoti Construction P Ltd. Jamshedpur without observing the guide lines issued by the Hd.
2,168.59 3 do 12mm size do 933.227 kg Rs.
Learned companynsel for the appellant has submitted that the tribunal has erred in law inasmuch as this amount was arrived at by the respondent without giving opportunity to the appellant.
The appellant was employed in the ministry of railways as inspector of works, in charge.
1170/93 and review petition in M.A. No.
1,717.94 2 do 16 mm size do 188.573 kg Rs.
