(Reserved on 20.01.2026)

Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad This the __09^th_day of March, 2026 Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (J)

Original Application No. 1180 of 2018 Harish Deshwal Aged about 36 years S/o Udal Singh R/o Jawahar Navodaya Vidyalaya, Taiyyapur, District-Auraiya.

……….. Applicant.

By Advocate: Mr. Ritesh Srivastava.

Versus

1. Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Noida.

2. Assistant Commissioner (E-III), Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Head Quarter, Noida, U.P.

3. Deputy Commissioner, Regional Office, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Lucknow.

……….. Respondents.

By Advocate: Mr. Mukesh Kumar.

Order The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, seeking quashing of the order dated 12.09.2014 passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, Lucknow Region, whereby the suspension period of the applicant was treated as not spent on duty and full pay and allowances were denied, as well as the appellate order dated 08.11.2017 disposing of the applicant’s appeal against the said order. Accordingly, the instant Original Application has been filed praying for the following reliefs: -

“(i) To quash the disposal of the appeal dated

05.11.2014 preferred by the applicant against the order No. F.10- 1(152)/NVS (LR)/Admn/2014/26990 dated 12.09.2014 passed by the Respondent No.3 vide Letter No. F.9-28/2011-NVS (Estt.)/2807 dated 08.11.2017 issued by the Respondent No.2 as well as the order dated 12.09.2014 passed by the Respondent No. 3 on reply made by the applicant on 23.05.2014 to the show cause notice dated 14.03.2014 issued by the Respondent No.3.

(i) to pass any other suitable order or direction, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(ii) to award the cost of the present application to the applicant.”

2. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant, working as TGT (Science) under Navodaya Vidyalaya Samiti, was placed under suspension w.e.f. 02.01.2009 consequent to his arrest in a criminal case under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC and Section 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. Subsequently, by judgment dated 04.08.2011, the competent criminal court acquitted the applicant of all the charges. After his acquittal, the applicant submitted several representations seeking revocation of suspension and reinstatement in service, and ultimately the suspension was revoked by order dated 19.07.2013 and he was posted to JNV Chamoli. Thereafter, a show cause notice dated 14.03.2014 was issued proposing to treat the suspension period as not spent on duty and to deny full pay and allowances for the said period. The applicant submitted a detailed reply/representation dated 23.05.2014; however, the same was rejected by the Deputy Commissioner, NVS, Lucknow Region, vide order dated 12.09.2014. Aggrieved by the rejection of his claim for regularization of the suspension period and grant of full pay and consequential benefits, the applicant has filed the present Original Application.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the impugned order dated 12.09.2014 is arbitrary, illegal and contrary to the settled principles of law, inasmuch as after the applicant’s acquittal by the competent criminal court, there remained no justification to deny him full pay and allowances for the suspension period. It was contended that the acquittal was on merits and not on technical grounds, and therefore the entire period of suspension ought to have been treated as spent on duty with all consequential service benefits. Learned counsel further argued that the respondents, while rejecting the representation vide order dated 12.09.2014, failed to consider the material placed on record and did not assign cogent reasons for depriving the applicant of his legitimate dues, thereby rendering the impugned order unsustainable in the eyes of law.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that the applicant, after revocat