Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai
Ganesh Ramesh Jadhav vs Department Of Atomic Energy on 18 August, 2025
1 OA No.652/2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,
MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI
ORIGINAL APPLICATION No.652 OF 2025
Dated this Monday, the 18th day of August, 2025
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. SHRI KRISHNA, MEMBER (A)
HON'BLE SHRI UMESH GAJANKUSH, MEMBER (J)
Ganesh Ramesh Jadhav, Age 30 years,
Working as Security Guard, B.A.R.C., Trombay,
Mumbai 400 085, Residing at : Babu Genu Chawl,
Mankhurd, Mumbai 400 088, (M) 9730458483,
Email : [email protected]. - Applicant
(By Advocate Shri Vicky A. Nagrani)
Versus
1. Union of India, Through the Secretary,
Department of Atomic Energy, Anushakti Bhavan,
CSM Marg, Mumbai 400 001.
2. Director (Personnel & Admn.) B.A.R.C.,
Personnel Division, Establishment IV Section,
Central Complex, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085.
3. Chief Administrative Officer, B.A.R.C.
Personnel Division, Establishment IV Section,
Central Complex, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085.
4. Dy. Establishment Officer, B.A.R.C.,
Personnel Division, Establishment IV Section,
Central Complex, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085.
5. Chief Security Officer, B.A.R.C., Central Complex,
Trombay, Mumbai 400 085. - Respondents
(By Advocate Shri N.K.Rajpurohit)
Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta
Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone=
8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92,
PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER=
870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN=
Khushboo Mittal Gupta
Gupta
Reason: I am the author of this document
Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30'
Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0
2 OA No.652/2025
ORAL ORDER
Per : Shri Krishna, Member (A)
This is the second round of litigation. In earlier round, the applicant has approached this Tribunal by filing OA No.488/2025 which was disposed of vide order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure A-15) and this Tribunal has directed that "the respondents to take a decision on the representation and in case, they come to the conclusion that the order dated 30th May, 2025 is to be maintained, respondents shall give fresh notice of 15 days to the applicant".
2. In pursuance to the above order of the Tribunal, the respondents have passed the impugned order dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure A-1) stating that they have constituted the Committee on 26.06.2025, which submitted its report on 10.07.2025 and recommended that the incident of trying to conceal and damage the Hand Held Card Reader (HHCR) on 11.11.2024 is a grave misconduct ,on the part of Shri Jadhav, which could have caused a huge threat to the security of the Nation. Therefore, the Committee recommended the termination of his services in terms of CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 and as per the terms and conditions of his offer of appointment. Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 3 OA No.652/2025 2(a). Accordingly, the Competent Authority has invoked the provisions of Rule 5 of CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 for his grave misconduct of concealing information regarding misplacement of the Hand Held Card Reader (HHCR) and in exercise of powers conferred on her under Sub Rule 2 of Rule 9 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965. By the impugned order, they have given him the notice of the termination with effect from the date of expiry of fifteen days from the date on which this notice is served on the applicant, which was served on him on 04.08.2025. Thus, the said period will expire on 19.08.2025.
2(b). In view of the above deadline, the learned counsel for the applicant has pressed for grant of interim relief.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant Shri Vicky A. Nagrani and the learned counsel for the respondents Shri N.K.Rajpurohit.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was appointed vide order dated 21.10.2022 (Annexure A-3) and he joined on 11.11.2022. He submits that in the appointment Khushboo Mittal Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta letter, probation period prescribed was one year and even after Gupta Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 extension of the probation, he has completed two years on 4 OA No.652/2025 11.11.2025 and, thus, he is deemed to have been confirmed. He further submits that the respondents have invoked CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 for his grave misconduct of concealing information regarding misplacement of the Hand Held Card Reader (HHCR). Thus, the order is stigmatic and it could have not been passed under Rule 5 of CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 as that provides for termination simplicitor and not with the stigma.
4(a). Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that since the applicant has completed more than two years of service and he is deemed to have been confirmed and, therefore, for removal from service, proper enquiry under Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 is required to be conducted and he cannot be terminated under Rule 5 of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965.
4(b). Learned counsel for the applicant has placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Ankita Giridhar Gopal Gupta Vs. Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Ltd. & Others in Writ Petition No.512 of 2023 decided on 27.03.2023, whereby, the Hon'ble High Court was Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta pleased to hold that "if dispensing with the services of an Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 5 OA No.652/2025 employee during probation is due to a stigmatic ground then a procedure is required to be followed including that of the departmental enquiry". The Hon'ble Court has further recorded that "The Petitioner is removed from service on the ground that the Petitioner has suppressed the fact of her working with NTPC and gave a false declaration that the Petitioner was in employment with the NTPC. This ground does not appear to be proper and not in consonance with the factual matrix of the case." 4(c). Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the impugned order is illegal and cannot be sustained in the eyes of law and, therefore, requires to be quashed and set aside. However, as an ad-interim relief, he has requested for stay of the impugned order for fourteen days.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, submits that the impugned order is perfectly justified in view of the terms and conditions of the appointment order. He drew our attention to paragraph No.1(a) of the appointment order dated 21.10.2022 (Annexure A-3), wherein, it was specifically mentioned that "Your appointment is temporary but is likely to continue indefinitely". You will be on probation for a period of one Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta year from the date of your appointment, which may be extended Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 6 OA No.652/2025 at the discretion of the Competent Authority". 5(a). Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that during the probationary period, the applicant is liable to be terminated without notice and even after the probation period is over and is liable to be terminated in accordance with Rule 5 of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 as amended from time to time. As per existing provisions of the said rules, his services are liable to be terminated by one month notice's notice or forthwith without any reasons being assigned and further, in the event of his services being terminated without one month's notice, he will be entitled to claim a sum equivalent to the amount of his pay plus allowances for the period of notice. 5(b). Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that as per para 5 of the appointment letter, which provides that if the offer of appointment on the aforesaid terms and conditions is acceptable, the applicant was required to communicate his acceptance. He submits that the applicant has accepted all terms and conditions as prescribed in the appointment order and, therefore, he is bound by appointment order. Since the appointment order itself provided that his appointment is Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta temporary but is likely to continue indefinitely, the claim of the Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 7 OA No.652/2025 applicant that he got deemed confirmation after two years is not correct as the appointment was subject to the terms and conditions provided therein.
5(c). Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the conduct of the applicant was not found satisfactory during the probation and, therefore, his probation was extended vide order dated 02.04.2024 (Annexure A-7) till 10.05.2024 and, thereafter, again for the period till 10.11.2024. However, vide memorandum dated 27.06.2024 (Annexure A-8), it was informed to the applicant that his performance is still not satisfactory and his Controlling Officer has recommended for further extension of probationary period till 10.11.2024, which was agreed by the Competent Authority in BARC. The applicant was informed that no further extension of probation beyond 10.11.2024 is permissible and hence, he was advised to improve his performance, failing which, considering him unfit for the assigned work, he would be terminated from the service without further notice, in terms of offer of appointment.
5(d). Learned counsel further submits that the applicant was put on notice vide the above memorandum dated 27.06.2024 Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta (Annexure A-8) to improve his performance, failing which he was Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 8 OA No.652/2025 liable to be terminated and he was very well aware of it. However, in spite of that, he tried to conceal and damage the HHRC, by which, he has put the security of the nation at risk as he is working in the BARC which is doing the Nuclear Research and which is very sensitive matter as it pertains to the security of the nation. He submits that any employee, who is found to be risking the security of the nation, he needs to be terminated. 5(e). Learned counsel for the respondents further submits that the applicant himself has apologized for the three incidents, which he has committed in the past vide his letter dated 13.01.2025 (Annexure A-10) and assured that there will be no recurrence of such incident and, therefore, looking to the history of the case, the impugned order should not be interfered with.
5(f). Learned counsel submits that the judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Ankita Giridhar Gopal Gupta (supra) relied upon by the learned counsel for the applicant is not applicable to the facts and circumstances of the case at hand as in that case, the Hon'ble High Court has recorded in paragraph No.10 of the order that "the petitioner had not suppressed the fact of employment. As such, the ground of false declaration made Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta by the Petitioner and for that the Petitioner has to be terminated, Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 9 OA No.652/2025 is incorrect". Further that invocation of Rule 5 of the CCS (Temporary Service) Rules, 1965 was not discussed. 5(g). Learned counsel further submits that, on the other hand, the applicant in the present case has accepted the charge of misconduct on three occasions and, therefore, the facts are totally different and that the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay cannot be relied upon.
6. In the rejoinder, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that the whole case is based on the finding of the Committee's report, which has not been provided to the applicant. Thus, it is the violation of the principles of natural justice.
7. We have heard both the learned counsels for the parties at length and, therefore, the OA is being disposed of at admission stage itself.
8. In view of the above facts and circumstances narrated by both the sides, we are of the view that the respondents should be directed to provide the copy of the report of the Committee dated 10.07.2025 to the applicant within a period of one week. The applicant is directed to submit his representation within a period Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta of fifteen days, thereafter, by taking all available grounds.
Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 10 OA No.652/2025 Thereafter, the respondents are directed to decide his representation within a period of two weeks, in accordance with law. Till the consideration of the representation of the applicant and passing of an appropriate order on his representation, the impugned order dated 01.08.2025 (Annexure A-1) shall not be given effect.
9. At this stage, the learned counsel for the applicant submits that vide earlier order dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure A-15) in OA No.488/2025, this Tribunal granted further fifteen days' time for giving fresh notice to the applicant and, therefore, the applicant may be reasonably protected, in case, any adverse order is passed on his representation. However, the aforesaid prayer was strongly opposed by the learned counsel for the respondents on the ground that in the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the cases of The State of Orissa Vs. Madan Gopal Rungta reported in AIR 1952 SC 12 decided on 25.10.1951 and Manish S. Pardasani Vs. Inspector State Excise reported in AIR Online 2019 SC 2588 decided on 07.01.2019.
10. We have considered the aforesaid prayer, however, the same is not acceptable in view of the judgment relied by the Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta learned counsel for the respondents. The interim protection as Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0 11 OA No.652/2025 observed above will be available till the decision of representation.
11. The Original Application is disposed of in terms of the above order and directions. No costs.
12. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
13. Pending MAs, if any, stand closed.
(UMESH GAJANKUSH) (SHRI KRISHNA)
MEMBER (J) MEMBER (A)
kmg*
Digitally signed by Khushboo Mittal Gupta
Khushboo Mittal DN: C=IN, O=Personal, OID.2.5.4.65=6dbe5c2d6885491895b4fb8ef3642a0b, Phone= 8985c11fad2960cfbb159f98c2764347c7a4ffbc50d436d4fe5701484c759b92, PostalCode=411060, S=Maharashtra, SERIALNUMBER= 870759ef2f1952335c4269bf3698e2204e6521bc46faf0d3fefceadf0c12c639, CN= Khushboo Mittal Gupta Gupta Reason: I am the author of this document Location:
Date: 2025.08.18 19:06:20+05'30' Foxit PDF Reader Version: 2025.1.0