Reserved CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Original Application No.200/94/2018 Jabalpur, this Tuesday, the 24^th day of June, 2025 HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SMT. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Umesh Singh Thakur (Sheru), S/o Late Vinod Singh Thakur, Age 18 years (approx.), R/o Sihora Old Bus Stand, Adupura, Sihora, Distt.

Jabalpur (M.P.).

-Applicant (By Advocate – Shri H.R. Naidu)

V e r s u s

1. Union of India through Ministry of Railways, Room No.256-A, Rail Bhawan, Raisina Road, New Delhi – 110001.

2. General Manager, G.M. Office, General Administration, West Central Railway, 3^rd Floor, Annex Building, Opp. Indira Mkt., Jabalpur 482001.

3. Disciplinary Officer, Senior Section Eng. K.B. Central Railway Admin. (Tech.) Deptt. Jabalpur (M.P.) 482001.

4. Assistant Works Manager (Tech.), West Central Railway, Jabalpur Division, Jabalpur (M.P.) 482001.

- Respondents (By Advocate –Shri P.K. Chaurasia)

(Date of reserving the order:- 15.05.2025)

Page 1 of 10 ANUPAM 2025.07.01 O R D E R By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM;

The applicant is challenging the order dated 05.11.2007 (Annexure A-1) whereby mother of the applicant has been removed from service.

2. The applicant is the son of Late Smt. Laxmi Thakur, who was appointed on compensatory ground after death of her husband. Mother of the applicant was unauthorizedly absent from duty during 14.04.2006 to 12.06.2006. She was issued with a major penalty chargesheet on 30.11.2006. Since the applicant’s mother did not turn up for participating in the departmental enquiry, an ex parte enquiry was conducted and the Inquiry Officer submitted the enquiry report on 25.09.2007 concluding that the charges are proved against her. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority imposed the major penalty of removal from service upon the mother of the applicant vide order dated 30.11.2006.

2.1 The applicant has contended that her mother was mentally challenged in 2006 and was sent to Gwalior Mental Hospital for treatment. The documents in this regard have been filed at Annexure A-2 and A-3 with the Original Application. At the time when the impugned punishment order dated 05.11.2007 (Annexure Page 2 of 10 ANUPAM 2025.07.01 A-1) was passed, the applicant and her sister were minor. The applicant and her sister were sent to Orphan’s Home and Child Recreation Centre as nobody was there to take care of them. The applicant’s mother, after a long treatment and due to illness died on 14.11.2006. The applicant states that the impugned order dated 05.11.2007 is bad in law as the same has been passed behind the back of her mother in contravention to the principles of natural justice.

3. In their reply, the respondents have stated that looing to the unauthorized absence of the applicant’s mother, she was issued with a major penalty chargesheet (SF-5). It has been stated by the respondents that the chargesheet was received by the applicant on 04.12.2006 but the mother of the applicant did not participate in the enquiry proceedings. Later on, an information was received that the mother of the applicant is absconding from her house from 02.06.2007 and an FIR was also lodged in this regard. As the enquiry was pending for considerable long time, again a notice dated 13.07.2007 was issued by the Inquiry Officer to appear in the enquiry proceeding which was sent at the address of the delinquent employee and also pasted on notice board of the Office. But the Page 3 of 10 ANUPAM 2025.07.01 same was returned undelivered with comment that addressee is not residing at given address. Hence, an ex-part enquiry was initiated against the mother of the applicant. During the course of the departmental enquiry, the Inquiry Officer had considered the available documents and examined the witness properly and submitted his enquiry report on 25.09.2007 to the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority after taking all due procedure and considering all documents on record issued speakin