Central Administrative Tribunal - Hyderabad
A Janardhana Rao vs M/O Railways on 21 June, 2022
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH OA/020/716/2020 HYDERABAD, this the 21° day of June, 2022 \Hon'ble Mr. K.V. Eapen, Admn. Member A. Janardhana Rao, So. Late A. Veeriah, Hindu, Aged about 36 VERTS, Ex-Elsctrical fitter' TRAVELS, Viavawada, Rio. HNo. 4-233, Pedda Padugupadu Village and Post, Kovur Mandal, Nellore [Nstrict, .. Applicant (By advocate < Sri 1M. Naidu) Leo) ¥ LUnion of India, Rep. by its Divisional Railway Manager, South Central Railway, DBM Compound, Vijayawada, Krishna District b> . Sentor Divisional Electrical Engineer/TRS/ELS/BZA, south Central Railway, ELS Compound, Vuayawada, Krishna District, Sapet . Divisional Electrical Engineer/TRS/ELS/BZA. South Central Railway, ELS Compound, Vuavawada, Krishna District ... Respondents (By Advocate: Sri A. Surender Reddy, Sr. PC for CQ) ecussssnssnuatan' Pao Poin y es ". fT wad f= 16/2020 ORAL ORDER
(As per Han'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Jdudl. Member} The present O.A, is filed secking the following reliefs:
"to declare the action of the 3rd respondent in rejecting the compassionate allowance Vide' Proceedings = No:
BYEDSOTRSALA/DAR, Dt:21,01.2020 on the stound that cos already rd respondent has Re eject ced his elatm Vide Proceedings No: BYE1SO0/TRS/11, MDAR, Dir03.01.2011, which is not been served earlier but same is served on the applicant along with Proceeding D621.01.2020 which are confirmed by the 2nd respondent Vide Proceeding gs No: BIE SOMTRS/I V/DAR, BEz2.05. 2020, is _Hlegal, arbitrary o The brief facts of the case are that the appheant''s father Sri A. 2G ms, Coxe pawn, £9 $3 pees oe Veersiah, while working as Railway Gangman, was medi decategorized in the year 1983, Thereafter, the applicant was appointed as Apprentice Fitter on 7.3.1984 in the Traction Rolling Stock department and his services were regularised int eh past of Electrical Lovo Fitter in 1987, While sa, he fell ick from 13.58.1996 to 29.7,1906 and hence submitted medical certificate issued by the Railway Hospital, Araku. Thereupon, the 3° Res espondents issued a charge meme to him on 19.9.1997 alleging that the medical certification produced by him is hol genuine, The applicant claims that the Inquiry Officer appointed to inquire into the matter, without giving proper opportunity to him, submitted report, proving the charge proved. As a result, Respondent No.3 imposed penalty of removal from service on the applicant vide order dated 21.10.2000. The applicant preferred appeal to the 2™ Pao 2 ara respondent, who confirmed the order of the 3° respondent vide order dated 2-11/10/2001. Revision petition filed by the applicant was rejected by the 1° respondent vide order dated 11,3.2002. Thereafter, the applicant made a representation dated 28.7,.2010 socking compassionate allowance as per the orders dated 4.112008 issued by the Railway Board in terms of proviso to Rule 63(1} of Railway Service (Pension) Rules, 1993. Upon the directions of this Tribunal in OA No.7 U/2019 filed by the applicant, Re espondent No.3 vide order dated 211.2020 rejected the representation of the applicant for grant of compassionate allowance. He has again preferred appeal dated 28.14.2020, which was rejected by the 2": respondent vide order dated 22.5.2020. Agerieved over the same, the applicant has fled the present oS CLA, 3, Notices were issued and the respondents have filed reply.
Learned counsel for the respondents has raised objection that the OLA, is barred by limitation. Since the subject matter of this OLA, compassionate allowance, we have condoned the delay in filing the OA. It is submitted in the reply statement that in the departmental inquiry conducted against the applicant, it has been clearly established that the medical certificate produced by him does not belong io Health Unity, Araku Railway Hospital which shows that the applicant has produced a bogus medical certificate, Te is Arther submitted that compassionate allowance can he given only in exceptional circumstances where case is found to be deserving special consideration. It cannot be given as a matter of course in every case coe ERR BAP A. oa OA/7 16/2020 where Govt. servant has been dismissed or removed form service. It is the claim of the respondents that SI. Circular No.169/2008 dated 4,11.2008 stipulates that where the competent authority, in exercise of its diseretionary powers, had not sanctioned compassionate allowance at the me of passing orders of remmoval/dismissal or immediately thereafter, cannot be reopened for review on the basis of representations received from the removed/dismissed employees and members of their family at a later date, Ultimately, they have prayed for dismissal of the OLA, 4, There is no representation on behalf of the appheant. Heard the learned counsel for' the respondents and perused the pleadings on record, LP :
ft i8 an undisputed fact that the applicant was removed from service on the charge that he had produced fake medical certificates to substantiate his absence, However, the orders passed by the Disciplinary' Appellate' Revision Authorities do not speak for ar against grant of compassionate allowance to the applicant. Thereafter, he has given a representation to the respondents, requesting for grant of compassionate allowance, which was rejected by the repsondents. Ip this context, we take support of RBE No. 164/2008 dated 04.1] 2008 wherein it was held as under:
nN.
3, bevrascees -However, in partial modification of Board's letter dated 9.5.2005, it has also been decided by the Board that aut of the past cases in which the disciplinary authority had not Passed any specific orders for or against grant of compassionate allowance, if any fase appears to be deserving for consideration being given, is OASFIB/2020 may be reviewed by the disciplinary authority concemed on receipt of representations of dismissed' removed employees or the family members of the deceased employees keeping in view the following conditions:
i) Only those past cases can be reviewed where records pertaining to D&A proceedings and service records are available. D&A proceedings are essential to take a fair decision duly considering the er: avity of the offence and other aspects involved therein and to confirm that the question of sanction or otherwise of compassionate allowance was not considered by the competent authority at any stage. Service records are essential to adj udge the kind of service rendered by the dismissed' removed emp! oyee and to determine the net qualifying service for working out the quantam af compassionate allowance, if sanctioned, ii} Each case will have ta be considered on its merits and conclusion reached on the question whether there were any extenuating factors assaciated with the case that would make the punishment of dismissal/ removal, which though imposed in the interest of the Railw: ivs, appear unduly hard on the individual.
mi) Not only the grounds on which the Railway servant was removed' dismissed, but also the kind of service rendered should be taken 1 mio account.
iv} Award of compassionate allowance should not be considered if the Rathway servant had been dish honest, which was a ground for his removal/ dismissal.
v) Though poverty is not an essential condition precedent to the award of compassionate allowance, due consideration can be made of the individual's spouse and children dependent upon him."
6 We are of the opinion that the applicant's case can be considered for grant of compassionate allowance in terms of the above said RBE No. lo4/2008 dated 04.11.2008. The respondents have to find out whether applicant's family is living in penury situation or not. For this purpose, 3 Welfare Officer should visit the family and submit his repart. After receipt of such report, the competent authority shall consider the Pao SAA case of the applicant for grant of compassionate allowance. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
od 7, With the above observation, the O.A. is allowed. Uf the applicant is still aggrieved, he is at Wherty to re-approach this Tribunal. There shall be no order as ft costs.
Pas & afta Pao Saf