Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
OA No.4286/2017
New Delhi this the 19th day of December, 2018
Hon’ble Ms. Nita Chowdhury, Member (A)
Hon’ble Mr. S.N. Terdal, Member (J)
Shri Sudhir Kumar Sharma,
Aged about 59 years, Group „B‟
Late S/o Late Sh. Kanhaiya Lal Sharma,
R/o B-406, Swaran Ganga Apartments,
Plot No. GH-5, Sector-6, Vasundhara,
Ghaziabad-201012 (UP)
- Applicant
(By Advocate: Ms. Pooja Tandon)
VERSUS
Union of India : Through
1. Secretary,
Railway Board,
Ministry of Railways,
Rail Bhawan, New Delhi
2. General Manager,
Northern Railways,
Baroda House, New Delhi-110001
3. Dy. Financial Advisor & Chief Accounts Officer,
Northern Railways, TA Office,
State Entry Road, New Delhi-110055
4. South Delhi Municipal Corporation,
Through Commissioner,
Civic Centre, JLN Marg,
New Delhi-110002
- Respondents
(By Advocates: Mr. Shailendra Tiwary for R-1 to R-3
Mr. RK Jain for R-4)
O R D E R (Oral)
Ms. Nita Chowdhury:
This OA has been filed by the applicant, claiming the following
reliefs:-
“a.
the petitioner above named most respectfully prays that
memorandum of charge sheet dated 23.09.2016 issued by
respondent No.3 in which charges are framed without any
evidence against the petitioner be quashed.
b.
the petitioner above named most respectfully further prays
that direction be passed for quashing the order dated
17.10.2016 in which inquiry officer and the presenting officer
are appointed from the organization of respondent N.4 which
is contrary to the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal)
Rules 1968.
c.
The petitioner, after getting fitness certificate from concern
doctor, should be allowed to join his duties without
unnecessary harassment by respondent No.3 on and after he
joins his duties.
d.
Such and further order may also be passed as this Hon‟ble
Tribunal deems fit in the interest of justice.”
2. It is the case of the applicant that he has sought stay of inquiry
proceedings on the ground that the documents have not been supplied to
him with regard to inquiry. Similarly, the next contention is that number
of representations have been made but the same are not being replied
too.
3. It is the contention of the respondents that there are serious
charges against the applicant and all the issues raised by him have to be
addressed to the inquiry officer and all claims made in his
representations have to be dealt with by the inquiry officer.
4. After hearing both the parties, prima facie, the view of the
respondents is upheld. We also note from the OA that the applicant
himself stated that the respondent no.4 vide his letter dated 03.07.2007,
gave the reply to him that the documents asked for will be provided to
him on personal appearance in inquiry or on any working day in
respondent office. Inquiry shall proceed and the applicant is given
permission to ask for whatever he wants in writing from the inquiry
officer and the same shall be dealt with as per the departmental inquiry
rules.
5. With the above order, the request of the applicant to quash/stay
the inquiry proceedings is rejected. Hence, OA is dismissed. No costs.
(S.N. Terdal)
(Nita Chowdhury)
Member (J)
Member (A)
/lg/
