SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(SC) 1070

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Doraiswamy Raju : S.R.Babu
Union Of India
Versus
Geeta Devi
Case No. : 9137 of 1995
Date of Decision : 8/9/01

Headnote:

Central Civil Services (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965, Rule 5 - Evidence Act, 1872, Section 108 - Temporary employee -Termination of service due to unauthorised absence- Respondent/wife of employee claimed that her husband was not traceable for the last more than seven years and claimed various reliefs namely, arrears of salary, family pension, payment of death-cum- retirement gratuity etc. as he was deemed to have died in harness- She also sought suitable employment- The Tribunal allowed the claim and also granted compensation of Rs. 50,000/- Not proper- The services of the husband of the respondent were terminated w.e.f. 23.9.1982- Therefore there was no question of giving any other relief to Respondent - Therefore, the order of the Tribunal set aside and the application filed by the respondent dismissed. [Paras 2 and 3]

JUDGMENT

S.RAJENDRA BABU, J.

(1) HUSBAND of the respondent, Bhimeent Sore, was appointed on casual basis from 24.9.1979. Thereafter, he was appointed on temporary basis from 8.12.1980 under the Central Civil Services (Temporary Services) Rules, 1965. It appears that thereafter he remained unauthorizedly absent. It appears he was admitted in the hospital on 4.4.1981 and discharged on 14.4.1981. He attended his duty upto 21.5.1981. Thereafter he remained absent. Inasmuch as the said employee absented from his duty without being permitted by necessary authority, the appellants initiated proceedings as contemplated under rule 5(2) of the CCS Temporary Services Rules and subsequently discharged him from service w.e.f. 23.9.1982. Thereafter an original application was filed by the respondent for various reliefs namely, arrears of salary, family pension, payment of death- cum- retirement gratuity and group insurance and to give suitable employment to her, as he is deemed to have died in harness. The basis upon which the respondent claimed the said reliefs is that her husband disappeared and remained missing for more than seven years and he should presumed to be dead.

(2) THE tribunal by an order made on 27.10.1994 directed to give whatever dues were payable to the respondent treating her husband to have died on 16.4.1988 and also directed to give a suitable employment to her in class IV as a dependant of the employee who dies in harness and in addition the payment of compensation of Rs. 50,000.00. This order is assailed in this appeal.

(3) IT is clear from the narration of the facts that the services of the husband of the respondent were terminated w.e.f. 23.9.1982. If that is so, question of giving any other relief as sought for by the respondent would not arise at all. The tribunal ignoring these aspects of the case has given the relief in question which we think is not in order. Therefore, the order made by the tribunal is set aside and the application filed by the respondent shall stand dismissed. The appeal is allowed accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top