O R D E R

By Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member (Judicial):-

Heard Mr. S.M. Ali, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents at the time of hearing.

2. The instant Original Application under Section 19 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 has been filed by the applicant for the following reliefs:

(i) To quash the impugned order dated 29-05-1997 removal from service, and impugned appellate order dated 16-06-2017 with all consequential benefits.

(ii) To appoint the applicant in the place of deceased employee and to provide the death cum retrial benefit along with 18% interest from due date to actual payment as per the facts and circumstances of the case and in the light of Railway Board Circular dated 19-06-2000.

(iii) To pass any such and further order as deem fit in the facts and circumstances of the cases (iv) Award The cost of the compensation in favour of the family of the deceased employee for suffering long time due to illegal and harsh action of respondents.

3. The brief facts as stated in the Original Application is that the father of the applicant namely, Late Ramesh Chand Kangali, was employed as a Group ‘D’ employee (Khalasi No. 864) in the Indian Railways w.e.f. 1981. During the course of his service, he fell seriously ill and remained under medical treatment from 19.07.1995 to 13.03.1996, initially under a private doctor and thereafter at Railway Hospital, Jhansi. Due to his prolonged illness, he could not attend his duties; however, he had duly informed the department from time to time.

3.1 Subsequently, a major penalty charge-sheet dated 22.01.1996 was issued against him for unauthorized absence. The inquiry concluded the inquiry and submitted his Report to the Disciplinary Authority, wherein it was observed that the employee was unauthorizedly absent only for a period of 13 days, i.e., from 06.07.1995 to 18.07.1995, while the remaining period of absence was under private sick w.e.f. 19.07.1995 to 13.03.1996 and information in this regard was communicated to the Department through UPC. Despite this, the Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 29.05.1997 imposed the penalty of removal from service.

3.2 Aggrieved by the same, the father of the applicant filed an departmental appeal on 11.07.1997 before the Appellate Authority, but the same was not decided for a considerable period. The father of the applicant made representation on 13.05.1998 to DME (D), Jhansi for cancellation of punishment, but no heed was paid. The applicant also made several representations dated 15.09.2005, 10.02.2009, and 08.04.2010 seeking grant of pensionary benefits or compassionate allowance, but no action was taken by the respondents. However, during the pendency of such representations/appeal, the father of the applicant expired on 06.08.2010 after prolonged illness.

3.3 After the death of the employee, the applicant, being his daughter, pursued the matter and sought information under the Right to Information Act in the year 2012, whereupon it was revealed that the departmental appeal was still pending. The applicant thereafter filed an Original Application No.887/2013 seeking retiral benefits and also to decide the pending representation dated 30.07.2012, which was disposed of vide order dated 29.03.2017, with a direction upon the applicant to file a substitution application and further directed the appellate authority to decide the appeal by passing a reasoned order.

3.4 In compliance thereof, the applicant filed a substitution application on 11.04.2017, which was allowed by the Appellate Authority. However, the Appellate Authority vide order dated 16.06.2017, upheld the punishment of removal from service passed by the Disciplinary Authority.

3.5 Being aggrieved by the aforesaid orders, the applicant has filed the present Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

4. On the other hand, counter reply was filed on 20.08.2018, wherein it has been stated that the