IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT JABALPUR BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIVEK RUSIA &

HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE PRADEEP MITTAL

th

ON THE 12 OF JANUARY, 2026 MISC. PETITION No. 3091 of 2025 UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS Versus B.L. BURMAN Appearance:

Shri Jai Shukla - Advocate for the petitioners.

None for the respondent.

ORDER Per: Justice Vivek Rusia Union of India and three others have filed this Miscellaneous Petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India against the order dated 05.07.2024, whereby the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur has allowed the O.A. No.200/00061/2014.

Facts of the case in short are as follows:

2. Vide order dated 01.02.1968, the respondent/applicant was appointed to the post of Telegraphist in the Other Caste Category. Later on, in the year 1974, he submitted a caste certificate dated 15.04.1974 issued by Deputy Collector Satna, certifying his Manji cast, which is a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Madhya Pradesh. The said certificate was taken into the record and he was given two promotions, one as ASTT and the second as TTS Group 'B', under the ST category. Anonymous complaints were made in the year 1991, that the respondent had produced a forged caste certificate. The respondent was served with the charge-sheet dated 16.12.1994 under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. He denied the charges, and hence, the departmental enquiry was initiated on 16.12.1994. During pendency of the enquiry, he was absorbed permanently in the BSNL with effect from 01.10.2000, and thereafter, retired upon attaining the age of superannuation with effect from 30.04.2003. The pending departmental enquiry had been continued under Rule 9(2)(b) of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972. The enquiry officer had submitted a report on 03.08.2000, i.e., after 6 years from the date of issuance of charge-sheet. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority took another 5 years to issue a penalty order dated 21.10.2005, reducing his pension to the minimum level.

3. The applicant submitted a review petition on 16.08.2012, which was rejected vide order dated 14.11.2013. Thereafter, the respondent approached the Central Administrative Tribunal. The learned Tribunal considered the effect of the circular dated 01.01.2018 issued by the General Administrative Department, State of Madhya Pradesh, in order to grant him protection of the caste certificate submitted by him during the service. The learned Tribunal has also quashed the charge-sheet and punishment order on the ground of delay in completion of the enquiry. Hence, this miscellaneous petition is before this court.

4. Shri Jai Shukla, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, submitted that the High Power Committee had invalidated the caste certificate issued to him, and thereafter, the SDM has cancelled the caste certificate issued to the respondent. Therefore, the circular dated 01.01.2018 would not apply in the case of the petitioner. The learned Tribunal, without deciding the applicability of the circular dated 01.01.2018, has wrongly quashed the charge-sheet and punishment order.

5. It is also argued by Mr. Shukla, learned counsel, that the scope of interference with the disciplinary matter by the Tribunal is very limited. The procedures as prescribed under the CCA Rules, as well as CCS (Pension) Rules, were followed. However, there was a delay in the completion of the enquiry, but that was duly explained in the reply. Hence, the impugned order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal is liable to be set aside, and punishment imposed be maintained.

6. It is contended that there was an inordinate delay in issuing the charge-sheet, submission of the enquiry report and passing of the punishment order. The applicant's pension has been drastically reduced to the minimum pension. There is no dispute that the applicant belongs to the Majhi caste, which is declared as a Scheduled Tribe in the State of Madhya Pradesh. At that time, t