Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
R P Singh vs M/O Housing And Urban Poverty ... on 14 December, 2018
CENTRAL ADMINSITRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH
NEW DELHI
***
OA 4573/2018
This is the 14th day of December, 2018
Hon'ble Mr. K.N. Shrivastava, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mr. S.N. Terdal, Member (J)
R.P. Singh, Group - B
S/o Shri Surjan Singh,
Aged Bout 56 years,
R/o SFS Flat No. 433,
Golden Jubilee Apartments,
Sector XI, Pocket 10, Rohini,
Delhi-110085 .... Applicant
(By advocate: Mr. Sudarshan Rajan with Mr. Ramesh Rawat)
VERSUS
1. National Institute of Urban Affairs
Through its Director
Core 4B, 1st and 2nd Floor,
India Habitat Centre,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
2. The President, Governing Council, NIUA
National Institute of Urban Affairs,
Core 4B, India Habitat Centre,
Lodhi Road, New Delhi-110003
3. Union of India
Through Secretary,
Ministry of Housing & Urban Affairs,
Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi ....Respondents
ORDER (ORAL)
By Mr. K.N. Shrivastava, Member (A), The applicant is working as Administrative and Accounts Officer (A&AO) in National Institute of Urban Affairs (NIUA). He was -2- OA 4573/2018 placed under suspension vide order dated 11.04.2014, Annexure-A- 3 (Colly). A Charge Memo was issued to him alleging that he had made false claim in regard to LTC reimbursement. It is stated that he had purchased E-ticket for Air journey for himself and family which he had submitted later to claim LTC reimbursement for the same. The inquiry was conducted in which the charge against the applicant was proved. The Disciplinary Authority, namely Director, NIUA, submitted its inquiry report vide its Annexure A-1, dated 16.06.2017, imposed the penalty of compulsory retirement upon the applicant. The applicant preferred his statutory appeal dated 24.07.2017, Annexure A-2 (Colly) before the departmental Appellate Authority namely President Governing Counsel/ NIUA.
2. Heard Mr. Sudarshan Rajan, learned counsel for the applicant.
3. Issue notice to the respondents. Mr. R.K. Jain, learned counsel accepts notice on behalf of the respondents.
4. After arguing for some time, learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant would be satisfied at this stage if a time bound direction is given to the Appellate Authority to decide Annexure A-2 appeal of the applicant dated 24.07.2017.
6. We find considerable merit in the submission of learned counsel for the applicant.
-3-OA 4573/2018
7. In view of the above, we dispose of this OA with a direction to the Appellate Authority, i.e. the President Governing Counsel/NIUS to dispose of Annexure A-2 appeal of the applicant dated 24.02.2017, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certify copy of this order by way of a reasoned and speaking order. However, the applicant is at liberty to file afresh OA in accordance with law if he is not satisfied with the appellate order. No costs.
(S.N. Terdal) (K.N. Shrivastava)
Member (J) Member (A)
/daya/