(Delivered by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Om Prakash VII, Member (J)

Ms. Saumya Mandhyan, learned counsel for the applicant and

Shri N.P. Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, were present at

the time of hearing.

2.

The instant original application has been filed seeking

following relief:

“(i)

to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

certiorari quashing the order dated 18.11.2009

2 | P a g e

(Annexure No. A-1) passed by the Joint Commissioner,

Academic and Administration, respondent no. 3.

(i) (a) to issue an order or direction in the nature of

certiorari quashing the order dated 15.01.2015

confirming the Memorandum dated 31.03.2014 /

01.04.2014;

(i) (b) to issue an order or direction in the nature of

certiorari quashing the order dated 16.08.2012 in so far

as it holds that the applicant would not be held to be

exonerated from Article Nos. 1, 2 & 3;

(ii)

to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

mandamus commanding the respondents not to give

effect the order dated 18.11.2009 passed by the

respondent no. 3;

(iii)

to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of

certiorari commanding the respondents to declare the

entire proceedings under the alleged disciplinary

proceedings to be void ab-initio as well as all the orders

passed in consequence thereof.

(iv)

to issue such other and further order or direction

which this Hon’ble tribunal may deem fit and proper in

the nature and circumstances of the present case;

(v)

Award cost of the petition to the applicant.”

3.

A compendium of the facts as have been narrated in the

present original application is that the applicant had filed this original

application being aggrieved by the impugned orders dated

18.11.2009, 15.01.2015 passed confirming the Memorandum dated

31.03.2014 / 01.04.2014 and 16.08.2012. The order dated 18.11.2009

was passed reinstating the applicant in service of Kendriya Vidyalaya

Sangathan (KVS) by imposing the penalty of reduction of pay to five

lower stages in the time scale of pay of the post being held by the

applicant w.e.f. the effective date of the applicant’s removal from

service i.e., 27.07.2003. It was also stated in the said order that the

3 | P a g e

intervening period between his removal from service and effective

date of resumption of duty on reinstatement will be treated as ‘dies-

non’ and no consequential benefit will be admissible to him for the

said period. In its order dated 16.08.2012 issued by the Revising

Authority, it was held that penalty imposed upon by the applicant by

the disciplinary authority is severe and also the modified penalty

imposed by the appellate authority was in excess to the extent of the

charges proved against the applicant. Therefore, a minor penalty was

issued of reduction to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by one

stage for a period of three years without cumulative effect and not

adversely affecting his pension in accordance with Rule 11 (iii) (a) of

CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. The order dated 15.01.2015 was passed by

the respondents in reply to the applicant’s representation dated

20.05.2014 which was preferred against the Memorandum dated

31.03.2014 / 01.04.2014. Vide the said Memorandum, the applicant

was given an opportunity to submit a representation within 60 days in

terms of Sub Rule 4 of FR 54 to decide finally the period of (i)

suspension from April 2002 to 26.03.2003 for which payment has

already been made by way of subsistence allowance and (ii) the

period of break in service from 27.03.2003 to 29.11.2009 to be

treated as “Dies-non”. By way of order dated 15.01.2015, the

Memorandum was confirmed.

4.

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that

during the pendency of the OA, the applicant has been retired from

service upon attaining the age of superannuation and therefore the

limited prayer of the applicant at this stage is that the penalty of “dies

non” which was imposed upon the applicant vide order dated

15.01.2015 be rescinded and the applicant be awarded all the