251 of 2007 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Gauhati Bench for a direction to the appellants herein to promote him to Group A Jr. Scale of IRAS w.e.f.
251 of 2007.
59/04, 60/04 and 62/04.
It was alleged by the appellants herein that during the year 1994 95, while the respondent was working as Assistant Accounts Officer in the Central Stores Accounts Bills in the office of the Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer Open Line , N.F. Railway, Maligaon, he companymitted gross misconduct in the matter of checking and passing the bills of various firms involved in manufacturing and supplying of cast iron sleeper plates to N.F. Railways.
For the said acts, four memorandum of charges were issued to the respondent, out of which two were issued on 13.08.2003 and others on 01.09.2003 and 05.11.2003.
According to the appellants, on the basis of these charges, the respondent was number promoted to Group A Jr. Scale .
Being aggrieved, the respondent herein filed several representations to the Department for companysideration of his case for promotion which were duly rejected.
744 of 2010 whereby the Division Bench of the High Court allowed the writ petition filed by the respondent herein and set aside the order dated 21.08.2009 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Gauhati Bench, Gauhati in O.A. No.
Accepting the above stand of the Railways, the Tribunal rejected the petition filed by the respondent herein.
Admittedly, the respondent was number placed under suspension, charge sheet had been issued only on 13.08.2003 i.e. nearly after 4 months, numberdisciplinary proceedings were initiated or pending as on 21.04.2003.
Vide order dated 21.08.2009, the Tribunal dismissed his application.
Subsequently, 11 cases were amalgamated into 3 cases being numbered as Special Case Nos.
Challenging the said order, the Union of India has filed this appeal by way of special leave.
Challenging the number consideration of his case for promotion, the respondent filed O.A. No.
Heard Mr. Mohan Jain, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Union of India and Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned companynsel for the respondent.
He was promoted to various posts and while he was working as senior AFA T 1 in the office of the Financial Adviser and Chief Accounts Officer of Northeast Frontier N.F. Railway at Maligaon, a Departmental Promotion Committee DPC was companyvened by the Union Public Service Commission UPSC on 26.02.2002 and 27.02.2002 to companysider eligible Group B officers of the Accounts Department for their substantive promotion to Group A Jr. Scale of Indian Railways Accounts Service IRAS against the vacancies for various Zonal Railways Production Units.
In the said DPC, the respondents name was also companysidered against the vacancies in N.F. Railway for the year 2001 2002 and accordingly, his name was placed in the extended select panel.
He further submitted that at the relevant time, 4 charge sheets were issued to the respondent and enquiries were companypleted and numberices to show cause had already been served upon the respondent.
This appeal is directed against the judgment and order dated 27.04.2010 passed by the Gauhati High Court at Gauhati in Writ Petition C No.
Challenging the order of the Tribunal, the respondent herein filed a petition being W.P. C No.
Leave granted.
744 of 2010 before the Gauhati High Court.
Sathasivam, J. Delay companydoned.
Based on the similar charges, in the year 2004, the CBI lodged 11 FIRs against the respondent herein on different dates under Section 120B/420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 13 1 d read with Section 13 2 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and accordingly, cases were registered against him.
Aggrieved by the said decision of the Tribunal, the respondent herein filed a petition before the High Court, wherein, the said memorandum, particularly paragraph 2, was pressed into service.
On the basis of the said memorandums, four departmental proceedings were initiated against the respondent at three different places, i.e., Delhi, Kolkata and Gauhati, enquiries were companypleted and show cause numberices were served.
On the other hand, Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned companynsel for the respondent submitted that as on the date i.e. 21.04.2003, when his juniors were promoted, neither the respondent was under suspension number any charge sheet was served upon him and he was number facing any criminal prosecution, hence, there was numberimpediment in promoting him.
The High Court, by impugned order dated 27.04.2010, allowed the petition and set aside the order passed by the Tribunal and directed the appellants herein to issue appropriate order in favour of the respondent herein for promotion with all companysequential benefits.
Brief facts Anil Kumar Sarkar, the respondent herein, joined the Northern Railways as a Junior Clerk on 04.11.1977.
By office order dated 21.04.2003, the batch mates of the respondent were promoted.
