J U D G M E N T (Dated this the 23^rd day of July 2025)

Basant Balaji J., The Petitioners are the Union of India and three others, who were Respondents in O.A. No. 180/0033/2022 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench. The present Respondent was the original Applicant in that case.

2. The Respondent began his service as a Mechanic with the Department of Southern Railway, Palakkad Division, on 23 May 2006. After being medically decategorized, he was deemed fit for "Cee-one and below" posts and subsequently assigned as a Technician Grade II (signal). Later, effective 26 September 2022, he was alternatively placed as an office clerk under the Senior Section Engineer/Career and Wagon.

3. While on duty, the Respondent applied for 10 days of leave on average pay and travelled to his native place. He failed to rejoin duty on 14 April 2017, which led to disciplinary proceedings initiated under Rule 9 of the Railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules , 1968. A Form No. 5 Memorandum was issued to his last known address and also posted on the office notice board in the presence of railway employees. Receiving no response, a Chief Loco Inspector was appointed as the enqui