Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Om Prakash Mishra vs Ramesh Narang) And J.T 2007 (11) Page 289 ... on 22 September, 2008
(OPEN COURT) CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ALLAHABAD BENCH ALLAHABAD HONBLE MR.A.K. GAUR , MEMBER (J). Original Application Number. 379 OF 2008. ALLAHABAD this the 22nd day of September, 2008. Om Prakash Mishra, S/o Late Deoki Nandan Mishra, Ex peon in the office of Dy. Chief Controller of Imports and Export at Kanpur, R/o 80/2, Vijay Nagar, Kanpur Nagar. Applicant. VE R S U S 1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Commerce and Industry, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi . 2. Director General of Forgeign Trade, Govt. of India, Udyog Bhawan, New Delhi. 3. Regional Joint Director of Foreign Trade, Govt. of India, 117/L-444, Kakadeo , Kanpur Nagar.. ..Respondents Advocate for the applicant: Sri S.N. Mishra Advocate for the Respondents : Sri R.K. Srivastava O R D E R
Through the instant O.A, the applicant has prayed for a direction to the respondents to release the provisional pension and other consequential benefits .
2. The case of the applicant is that he was implicated in a criminal case under section 409, 420 read with 120(B) IPC and section 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(D) read with 3(D) Prevention of Corruption Act and the CBI submitted the charge sheet against the applicant and one Amarnath Arora. According to the applicant, he was getting provisional pension, which he received till February, 2007 but after his conviction in criminal case, the respondents stopped paying him provisional pension without giving him any opportunity or notice, which is wholly illegal. It has further been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that after conviction and sentence , the applicant filed Criminal Appeal before the Honble High Court in which the execution of sentence has been stayed. Learned counsel has further submitted that since the sentence awarded to the applicant has been suspended by the Honble High Court, he is entitled for provisional pension.
3. Opposing the claim of the applicant, learned counsel for the respondents vehemently argued that in view of catena of decisions rendered by the Honble Supreme Court, the applicant is not at all entitled to get any provisional pension.
4. I have heard and learned counsel for the parties at considerable length and carefully perused the pleadings on record.
5. Having carefully perused the judgments rendered in of J.T. 1995 (1) SC page 575 (Rama Narang Vs. Ramesh Narang) and J.T 2007 (11) page 289 State of Punjab Vs. Deepak Mattu, I am of the considered view that mere granting bail in appeal or suspending the sentence by the higher court, will not absolve the applicant from the clutches of conviction. In view of the decision rendered by Apex Court in K.C. Sarins case reported in JT 2001 Vol 6 SC page 59, State of Haryana Vs. Hasmat JT 2004(6) SC 6, State of Haryana Vs. Gajanan JT 2003(10)SC 164 (para 8) and 1995(3) SCC 377 Dy. Director Vs. N. Meera. The Apex Court in the above referred cases has held that once conviction has been awarded to the applicant, the grant of stay of sentence by the appellate court would not obliterate the effect of conviction and the department shall proceed departmentally and in view of the aforesaid decisions, the applicant has failed to make out any case warranting interference. Learned counsel for the applicant at this stage requested that the grievance of the applicant might be redressed in case a direction is given to the competent authority to consider and decide the representation dated 09.07.2007 by a reasoned and speaking order taking into account the points raised therein, and in accordance with law, within specified period.
7. Learned counsel for the respondents has no objection, if such direction is given.
8. Accordingly I direct competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the applicant dated 09.07.2007 by a reasoned and speaking order taking into account the points raised therein and in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order.
9. With the aforesaid directions, the O.A is disposed of finally with no order as to costs.
Be noted that I have not passed any order on merits of the case.
MEMBER- J.
/Anand/ ??
??
??
??
4