Central Administrative Tribunal - Lucknow
Ram Chandra Tiwari vs Union Of India on 3 January, 2024
CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW
Original Application No. 00042 of 2016
Order Dated: This, the 3rdday of January, 2024
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Ojha, Member-Judicial
Hon'ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative
Ram Chandra Tiwari, aged about 46 years,
S/o Late Ram Krishna Tiwari,
R/o A-63 Awas Vikas Colony,
Indira Nagar, Rai Bareli.
.....Applicant
By Advocate: Shri Raj Singh.
VERSUS
1. The Union of India through
The Secretary Ministry of Human Resources and Development,
New Delhi.
2. The Central School Organization (Head Quarter),
18, Institutional Area Shaheed Jeet Marg,
New Delhi through its Chairman.
3. The Commissioner,
Central School Organization (Head Quarter),
18 Institutional Area,
Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg,
New Delhi.
4. The Chairman,
Vidhayalaya Managing Committee,
KendriyaVidhyalaya,
Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
5. The Deputy Commissioner,
Regional Officer,
Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangathan,
Sector-J,Aliganj, Lucknow.
6. The Assistant Commissioner (Vig),
Kendriya Vidhyalaya Sangathan,
(Head Quarter), New Delhi.
7. The Principal,
Page 1 of 7
CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors
Kendriya Vidhyalaya,
Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.
.....Respondents
By Advocate: Smt.Prayagmati Gupta
Shri A. Kant holding brief for Ms.Pushpila Bisht
ORDER (ORAL)
Per Hon'bleMr.Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case, the applicant has challenged the order of his termination from service seeking the following reliefs:
"A. That by means of suitable order or direction the impugned order dated 04.02. 2015 issued by the Commissioner, Central School Organization (Head Quarter), 18, Institutional Area, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi as contained in Annexure No. 1 to the original application, be quashed and the opp. Parties be directed to reinstate the applicant in service with all consequential service benefits of arrears of pay and allowances etc. along with interest @ 12% p.a. w.e.f. the date of due till the date of actual payment.
b.Allow the claim petition with costs.
c.Issue any other order or direction of any nature which this Hon'ble Tribunal deems just and proper in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice."
2. The applicant was appointed as teacher [PGT (Chemistry)] in 2002 in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS). While teaching in Kendriya Vidyalaya (KV), Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, the applicant was arrested in a criminal offence on 01.02.2015 on the basis of F.I.R. lodged by the parents of a girl student. The applicant was placed under suspension vide order dated 02.02.2015 and his service were terminated vide order 04.02.2015. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.
3.1 The applicant states that he was an employee whose service had been confirmed by the respondents and, therefore, termination of his service vide the impugned order dated 04.02.2015 was not possible. The Page 2 of 7 CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors applicant has also referred to his record of unblemished service throughout his career.
3.2 It is contended that the copies of the preliminary enquiry and the summary enquiry reports mentioned in the impugned order dated 04.02.2015 were not supplied to the applicant denying him a reasonable opportunity to defend himself against the principles of natural justice. 3.3 It is further contended by the applicant that the procedure under the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 [CCS (CCA) Rules] was dispensed with and no regular enquiry involving examination and cross examination of witnesses was held. 4.1 The respondents state that KVS is an autonomous body registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860 and is fully financed by the Central Government. It is contended that the applicant has approached this Tribunal without preferring the departmental appeal. 4.2 For smooth functioning of KVs, the Education Code approved by the Board of Governors has been framed. Article 80 of the Education Code provides for extension of CCS (CCA) Rules to the employees of KVS mutatis mutandis. To safeguard the interest of female students and protect them from teachers who are involved in demonstrating immoral behavior, the following special provision under Article 81(B) has been framed:
"Where the Commissioner is satisfied after such a summary enquiry as he deems proper and practicable in the circumstances of the case that any member of the Kendriya Vidyalaya is prima facie guilty of moral turpitude involving sexual offence or exhibition of immoral sexual behavior towards any student, he can terminate the services of that employee by giving him one month's or three months' pay and allowances accordingly as the guilty employee is temporary or permanent in the service of the Sangathan. In such cases, procedure prescribed for holding enquiry for imposing major penalty in accordance with CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 as applicable to the employees of the Kendriya Vidyalaya Page 3 of 7 CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors Sangathan, shall be dispensed with, provided that the Commissioner is of the opinion that it is not expedient to hold regular enquiry on account of embarrassment to student or his guardians or such other practical difficulties.
The Commissioner shall record in writing the reasons under which it is not reasonably practicable to hold such enquiry and he shall keep the Chairman of the Sangathan informed of the circumstances leading to such termination of services."
4.3 It is stated by the respondents that the parents of a girl student of the KV concerned lodged a criminal complaint on 01.02.2015 against the applicant for making the student, their daughter, pregnant and getting abortion done forcibly in a private nursing home. The matter was investigated a preliminary inquiry committee on 02.02.2015. After considering the findings of preliminary enquiry, a Summary Inquiry Committee was constituted vide order dated 02.02.2015 which submitted its report with the findings that "Prima facie, the charge of sexual abuse culminating into pregnancy and forceful abortion are established." After considering the statement of girl student, F.I.R. dated 01.02.2015, preliminary inquiry report and the summary inquiry report and other documents related to the case, the impugned order dated 04.02.2015 was issued dispensing with the procedure under CCS (CCA) Rules under Article 81 (B).
5.1 In the rejoinder affidavit dated 16.08.2022 filed by the applicant vide CMA No. 1445 of 2022, it is stated that no appeal is prescribed against the order of termination under the statutory rules.
5.2 It is further stated that F.I.R. was lodged against the applicant having case crime no. 94/2015 under section 376C, 506, 313, 467, 471, 201, 420 of IPC and under section 5 & 6 of the POCSO Act. After investigation charge sheet was submitted by the police in the court of Special Judge, POCSO Act/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow having ST No. 326/2015 which Page 4 of 7 CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors was finally decided vide judgment dated 18.04.2022 acquitting the applicant.
6.1 In the supplementary affidavit filed by the respondents it is It is reiterated that against the termination order dated 04.02.2015, departmental appeal is prescribed but the applicant, without filing the departmental appeal, has filed the OA which is barred by section 20 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
6.2 It is further stated that the acquittal was based on failure to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt. As such, the acquittal cannot be termed as an honorable acquittal in terms of judicial pronouncements on the matter, including in judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India &Orsvs Methu Meda (2022) 1 SCC 1and Commissioner of Police, New Delhi &Anr vs Mehar Singh (2013) 7 SCC 685. Further, mere acquittal does not entitle an employee to reinstatement in service in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Imtiaz Ahamd Malla vs State of Jammu & Kashmir &Ors (2023) SCC Online SC 205. The State of U.P. has assailed the order dated 18.04.2022 passed by the Special Judge POCSO Act, ASJ, Lucknow before Hon'ble High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. A378-22 of 2022. The Hon'ble High Court, admitting the case, has passed order dated 21.06.2022 summoning the lower court's records.
7. We have heard both the parties.
8.1 It is observed at the outset that the provision of appeal is provided for in Article 81(C) of the Education Code of KVS extracted below:
"(C) Appeal:
(i) Appellate Authority - An employee of the Sangathan who has ceased to be in Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan services by virtue of an order passed against him under Article 81(B) of the Education code, may prefer an appeal against the aforesaid order to the Vice-Chairman, KVS. Page 5 of 7
CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors
(ii) Period of Limitation of Appeals- No appeal preferred under this article shall be entertained unless it is preferred within a period of 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order appealed against is delivered to the appellant ; provided that the Appellate Authority may entertain the appeal after the expiry of the said period, if the authority is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal in time.
(iii) Form and Contents of Appeal- Form and contents of the appeal shall be the same as prescribed under the CCS(CCA) Rules, 1965 and applicable under this article.
(iv) Consideration of Appeal - In the case of an appeal under this article, the Appellate Authority shall consider whether in the light of the provisions of Article 81 (B) of the Education Code and having regard to the circumstances of the case, the order of termination is justified or not and confirm or revoke the order accordingly.
The Appellate Authority shall consider the following and pass orders confirming or setting aside the order of termination passed under Article 81 (B) :-
(a) Whether the requirement laid down under Article 81(B) has been complied with and, if not, whether such non-compliance has resulted in the violation of the Provisions of Article 81(B) or in the failure of justice, and
(b) Whether the order of the Commissioner is warranted by the material on the record.
(v) Implementation of Orders in Appeal - the Authority which made the order appealed against shall give effect to the order passed by the Appellate Authority.
(vi) Finality of Order Passed in Appeal- The order of the Appellate Authority made under this Article shall be final and shall not be called into question by way of any further application / petition for revision, review, etc. "
(emphasis supplied) 8.2 In view of the above, in the interest of justice, we direct that the appellant shall prefer an appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order in terms of Article 81 (C). Such an appeal shall not be treated as time barred and it shall be considered and decided on merits by the competent authority by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the appeal. We make it clear that we have not made any observation on merits of the impugned order dated 04.02.2015. The applicant shall be at liberty to approach this Tribunal, if aggrieved from the order of the appellate authority. The OA is disposed of with these directions. 8.3 Pending MAs, if any, are also disposed of.
Page 6 of 7
CAT,Lucknow Bench OA No. 332/00042 of 2016 Ram Chandra Tiwari Vs. U.O.I.&Ors 8.4 The Parties shall bear their own costs.
(Pankaj Kumar) (Justice Anil Kumar Ojha)
Member (A) Member (J)
vidya
Page 7 of 7