Central Administrative Tribunal - Kolkata
Anath Bandhu Guria vs D/O India Post on 24 July, 2019
/'■ 1
oa 253/2014
i CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH
KOLKATA
0. A/350/253/2© 14 Date of Order: 24,07.2019
Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Bidisha Banerjee, Judicial Member
Horj'ble Dr. (Ms.) Nandita Chatterjee, Administrative Member
Shri Anath Bandhu- Curia, son of Late Debendra
Nath Guria, aged about 59 years, working as
G.D.S. Branch Post Master, Nij-Kasba Branch
Post Office, under Contai Division, now under
order of removal from engagement, residing ,at
V,ill. & P.O. Nij-Kashba, P.S Khejuri, Dist. Purba
Medinipur.
"Applicant.
•versus-
1. Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry
of Communication, Department of Posts, Dak
Bhavan, New Delhi -.1.
2. The Chief Post Master General, Y'ogayog
!•
Bhavan, C.R.. Avenue'y Kolkata. -- 700©12.
3. The Post Master General, South Bengal
Region,-Yogayog Bhavan, Kolkata - 700012.
4. 'The Director of Postal Services, South Bengal
Region, P-36. C.R. Avenue, Yogayog Bhavan,
Kolkata- 700012.
5. The Superintendent of Post Offices, Contai
Division, P.O Contai, Dist. Purba Medinipur -
721401:
6. The Inspector of Post Offices, Contai 2nd sub'
division, P.O Contai, Dist. Purba Medinipur -
721401.
7. Sri Rabindra Nath Panja, ASRM, Howrah
RMS/2, RMS WB Division, Howrah-1 & 1-0.
••Respondents
For The Applicant(s): Mr. A. Chakraborty, counsel
Ms. P. Mondal, counsel
For The Respondent(s): Ms. M. Bhattacharya, counsel
2.
i
oa 253/2014 i
0 R D E R (Oral)
Per: Ms. Bidisha Baneriee, Member (J):
r Heard Id. counsel for both the parties.
2. Since the applicant has been acquitted of the charges framed under 409 IPC and on identical charges he has been removed from service, but no representation has been preferred to the higher authorities seeking revision of the order of removal in view of subsequent acquittal, applicant is granted liberty to prefer a suitable comprehensive representation to the competent i i authority within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of this order to seek ! benefit of the ratio in G.M. Tank versus State of Gujarat 2006 SCC (L&S) 1121.
3. In the event such representation-is preferred, the respondent authority shall dispose it of in the light of G.M. Tank versus State of Gujarat 2006 SCC i (L&S) 1121 and pass a reasoned and speaking order within 2 months 1 thereafter.
' 4. It is made clear that we have not entered into the merits of the matter v r1 and, therefore, all points are kept open for consideration of the respondent authorities.
5. O.A accordingly stands disposed of. No costs I (Nandita Chatterjee) 'v- (Bidisha Ban&rjee) Member (A) Member (J) ss i i ( ! I 1 < I