5000 to 8000 to senior TC in the time scale of 4000 to 6000 for a period of three years recurring subject to the companydition that the period between the date of dismissal to date of reinstatement shall be treated as period under suspension.
He was of the view that the punishment of dismissal was excessive in respect of the proved charges and, therefore, he set aside the dismissal and imposed the punishment of reduction in rank from TTE in the time scale of Rs.
The General Manager, in exercise of his revisional power, after giving an opportunity to the respondent to show cause, revised the order of the Appellate Authority and passed an order dated 8.9.2005 increasing the punishment to dismissal.
However, the subsequent writ petition filed by the respondent challenging the order of the Tribunal was allowed by the Madras High Court, by the impunged order dated 22.10.2010.
He held that even in regard to charges 1, 6 and 7 which were held to be proved, the respondent deserved the punishment of dismissal.
In regard to seven charges, as per charge memo dated 19.2.1997, a departmental inquiry was held and the Inquiry Officer submitted an report dated 13.6.2002 holding that the charges were proved except a part of the charge No.2 .
The disciplinary authority accepted the inquiry report and imposed the punishment of dismissal on the respondent by order dated 26.7.2002.
The Tribunal, by order dated 30.5.2007, dismissed the original application filed by the respondent and companyfirmed the punishment imposed.
The appellate authority held that only charges 1,6 and 7 were proved and charges 2,3,4 and 5 were number proved.
The High Court was of the view that the revisional authority was number justified in interfering with the decision of the appellate authority.
The respondent filed an appeal and the appellate authority, by order dated 20.2.2003, allowed the appeal of the employee in part.
Feeling aggrieved, the respondent approached the Central Administrative Tribunal and challenged the punishment.
The said order is challenged in this appeal by special leave.
The respondent was a Travelling Ticket Inspector in the Southern Railway.
Leave granted.
Heard.
