Court No. - 34
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 53592 of 2007 Petitioner :- Union Of India Thru The Secretary And Others Respondent :- Qavi Mohammad Counsel for Petitioner :- S.K. Misra, Saurabh Srivastava Counsel for Respondent :- Rama Kant Shukla,S.C.
Hon'ble Sudhir Agarwal,J. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J.
1. Heard Sri Saurabh Srivastava, learned counsel for petitioner, learned counsel for respondent and perused the material on record.
2. This writ petition is directed against Judgment and order dated 10th July 2000 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad (hereinafter referred to as 'Tribunal') whereby Original Application No. 443 of 2002 filed by applicant-respondent no. 1 Qavi Mohammad has been allowed and punishment order dated 27.5.2000 passed by Disciplinary Authority and appellate order dated 31.10.2000 passed by Appellate Authority have been set aside on the ground that Rule 15 (2-A) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 (hereinafter referred to as 'Rules 1965') has been violated and not complied with. Rule 152 A of the Rules 1965 reads as under:-
“Rule 15 (2-A): The disciplinary authority shall consider the representation, if any, submitted by the Government Servant and records its findings before proceeding further in the matter, as specified in sub rule (3) and (4).”
3. It is not disputed by learned counsel for petitioners that, as a matter of fact, applicant-respondent has submitted representation. Very concept of Rule 15 (2-A) is that an opportunity is to be given to the Government employee to make representation and in case such a representation is made, an order has to be passed by authority concerned after considering the stand taken in the said representation by concerned employee, otherwise the order of disciplinary authority would stand vitiated for being in violation of principles of natural justice. Rule 15 (2-A) is mandatory. In the present case, said Rule has not been followed by authority concerned as the stand taken by respondent in his representation has not been taken into consideration while passing punishment order. As such, we find no error in the impugned Judgment and order dated 10.7.2007 passed by Tribunal in setting aside punishment order dated 27.5.2000 passed by Disciplinary Authority and appellate order dated 31.10.2000 passed by Appellate Authority.
4. Dismissed.
Order Date :- 27.11.2019 Ram Murti