Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Buland Singh Yadav vs M/O Railways on 28 February, 2023
1
Item No. 27 (C-3) O.A. No. 1735/2016
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH: NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 1735/2016
This the 28th day of February, 2023
Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Member (J)
Hon'ble Dr. Anand S. Khati, Member (A)
Buland Singh Yadav (aged about 22 years)
S/o Sh. Hari Shankar Yadav
Ex. TADK under Director Mechanical Engineering/
(C&IS) Railway Board,
New Delhi.
Present Address: Village Kachhaura
Post Bahripur
Distt. Jaunpur (UP) Pin-222175 ...Applicant
(By Advocate : Mr. Yogesh Sharma)
Versus
1. Union of India Through
General Manager
Northern Railway HQ Baroda House
New Delhi-110001.
2. Secretary/Ministry of Railways and
Chairman Railway Board
Ministry of Railway
Rail Bhawan, Raisina Marg
New Delhi-110001.
3. Chief Personnel Officer
Northern Railway HQ
Baroda House, (Annexe-1), 3rd Floor,
Personnel Branch, New Delhi-110001.
2
Item No. 27 (C-3) O.A. No. 1735/2016
4. Assistant Personnel Officer/HQ
(i.e. APO/HQ in short)
Northern Railway HQ
3rd Floor, Annexe-1
Baroda House, New Delhi-110001.
5. Sh. Akhilesh Mishra
Director Mechanical Engg./C and I.S/
Railway Board, House No. D-20, Sector 39,
Noida (Gautam Budh Nagar)
U.P. 201301.
6. Sh. Anand
Private Servant of Sh. Akhilesh Mishra,
H. No. D-20, Sector 39,
Noida (UP) 201301.
7. Mrs. Maya Mishra (Mother of Sh. Akhilesh Mishra)
H.No. D-20, Sector 39,
Noida (Gautam Budh Nagar)
U.P. 201301 ....Respondents
(By Advocate : Mr. R. S. Rana)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Ashish Kalia, Member (J) The applicant has filed this OA seeking the following main reliefs :-
"(i) That Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to set aside and quash the illegal, arbitrary and discriminatory order dated 08.09.2015 issued by Respondents, whereby services of applicant have been illegally terminated without conducting any disciplinary enquiry on the false allegations 3 Item No. 27 (C-3) O.A. No. 1735/2016 of unauthorized absence in view of law & rules cited above.
The applicant was always available and willing to perform his duty as TADK of Sh Akhilesh Mishra and it is Sh. Mishra who is & was marking applicant as absent illegally. Respondents are violating Article 14, 16 & 21 of Constitution of India.
(ii) The Respondents should he ordered to allow applicant to perform his duty as TADK for which post he is always available and willing to work.
(iii)(a)The Respondents be ordered to pay all the salary with 18% interest per annum to application w.e.f 29.05.15 from which date he is being illegally marked absent even though applicant was always available and willing to perform his duty as TADK but it is Sh. Akhilesh Mishra who was illegally marking applicant as absent.
(b) The Railway Administration should be ordered that after paying this salary w.e.f 29.05.15 along with 18% interest to applicant, the same should be recovered from the salary of sh. Akhilesh Mishra who was illegally marking applicant as absent.
(iv) Respondents should be ordered to take work from applicant as per Railway Servants (Hours of work and periods of rest) rules 2005 as given in Indian Railway Act 1989, and grant weekly rest to applicant as per these rules, Applicant should also be allowed to avail 3 national holidays on 26th January, 15 August and 2nd October & Gazetted holidays as allowed by rules.
(v) Respondents should be ordered to pay costs of this litigation as applicant has been forced by Respondents to resort to it, inspite of legal noticesheet to them." 4 Item No. 27 (C-3) O.A. No. 1735/2016
2. The applicant is working as Bunglow Peon/TADK with the respondents with effect from 23.06.2014. His services were terminated vide order dated 08.09.2015. It has been informed by the Controlling Officer that the applicant was unauthorizedly absent from duty since 29.05.2014 and despite repeated attempts to contact him on mobile, he could not be contacted and the attempts has not been successful. The applicant has annexed along with the petition a medical certificate of Dog biting on 18.04.2015 while he was taking care of two dogs Rani and Joy. He was asked to take rest by the concerned officer. Thereafter, on 06.06.2015 he has joined the duty but he was not allowed to mark attendance. Feeling aggrieved by this, he has approached this Tribunal.
3. Notices were issued to the respondents who filed reply. In their reply the respondents admitted that the applicant has worked for more than 120 days. But, due to alleged un-satisfactory services such as unauthorised absence, his services were terminated. 5 Item No. 27 (C-3) O.A. No. 1735/2016
4. After going through the records, prima facie it transpires that the applicant has actually suffered because of dog bite for which he has annexed a certificate of a reputed hospital of Noida which is a CGHS approved hospital. Without taking plight of the applicant into consideration by the respondents, he was simply terminated from service by stating that his services are no more required. The applicant has admittedly performed his duties and suffered because of dog bite. Actually, the owner of these dogs is responsible for getting him treated in the Railway Hospital. However, he has abdicated his duty as owner of the dogs has vicarious liability. On the contrary, the applicant has been awarded by termination which is not acceptable by this Tribunal as fair and just.
5. We hereby set-aside the impugned order and direct the respondents to consider him for any equivalent job available with the Railways as per his eligibility, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. He is entitled for all consequential 6 Item No. 27 (C-3) O.A. No. 1735/2016 benefits including monetary benefits. It is also relevant to mention that immediately on completion of 120 days, the officer concerned should have reported to the concerned authorities for his regularisation which he did not do so.
6. The OA stands disposed of with the above direction. There shall be no order as to costs.
(Dr. Anand S. Khati) (Ashish Kalia) Member (A) Member (J) /Mbt/