Gujarat High Court
Union Of India & 2 vs Devki Nandan S/O Shyamal Sharma & on 14 September, 2016
Author: M.R. Shah
Bench: M.R. Shah, A.S. Supehia
C/SCA/3424/2016 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 3424 of 2016
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
======================================
1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be
allowed to see the judgment ?
2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair
copy of the judgment ?
4 Whether this case involves a substantial
question of law as to the interpretation of the
Constitution of India or any order made
thereunder ?
======================================
UNION OF INDIA & 2....Petitioner(s)
Versus
DEVKI NANDAN S/O SHYAMAL SHARMA & 1....Respondent(s)
======================================
Appearance:
MR RAVI KARNAVAT, ADVOCATE for the Petitioner(s) No. 1 - 3
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
and
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.S. SUPEHIA
Date : 14/09/2016
ORAL JUDGMENT
(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) Page 1 of 3 HC-NIC Page 1 of 3 Created On Sat Sep 17 00:30:24 IST 2016 C/SCA/3424/2016 JUDGMENT
1. By way of this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India the petitioners have prayed for an appropriate writ, order or direction to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench (hereinafter referred to as "the learned tribunal") in O.A. No.317/2012 dated 30/04/2015 by which the learned tribunal has allowed the said O.A. preferred by the original applicant-respondent herein and has quashed and set aside the order of penalty dated 16/05/2012 and has remanded the matter back to the disciplinary authority to pass an appropriate order after giving an opportunity to the original applicant to make a representation in respect of UPSC advice, which was relied upon by the disciplinary authority while passing the penalty order, however which was admittedly not given to the original applicant, the petitioners have preferred the present petition.
2. Shri Ravi Karnavat, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners has requested to pass an appropriate order considering the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.20789/2015 by which in the similar set of facts and circumstances the Division Bench has confirmed similar order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal.
3. Heard Shri Ravi Karnavat, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners. At the outset, it is required to be noted and it is not in dispute that the issue involved in the present petition is now not res integra in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Page 2 of 3 HC-NIC Page 2 of 3 Created On Sat Sep 17 00:30:24 IST 2016 C/SCA/3424/2016 JUDGMENT Union of India & Ors. Vs. S.K. Kapoor reported in (2011) 4 SCC 589. After following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of S.K. Kapoor (Supra) the learned tribunal has quashed and set aside the order of penalty imposed by the disciplinary authority and has remanded the matter to the disciplinary authority to pass an appropriate order after giving an opportunity to the original applicant with respect to UPSC advice. It is an admitted position that while passing the order of penalty the disciplinary authority has considered and relied upon the UPSC advice, which was admittedly not given to the original applicant.
4. In the identical facts and circumstances of the case, the Division Bench of this Court in Special Civil Application No.20789/2015 has dismissed the petition preferred by the very petitioners and has confirmed the similar order passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal. In fact we have also taken the similar view in subsequent matters relying upon the decision in the case of S.K. Kapoor (Supra).
5. In view of the above and for the reasons stated hereinabove, there is no substance in the present petition, which deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.
(M.R. SHAH, J.) (A.S. SUPEHIA, J.) Siji Page 3 of 3 HC-NIC Page 3 of 3 Created On Sat Sep 17 00:30:24 IST 2016