CHANDIGARH, January 15: A bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal, comprising administrative member N.K. Verma and judicial member Jasbir Singh Dhaliwal, vacated the interim orders whereby the transfer of Deepak Kumar Sharma, Assistant Commercial Manager-II, Northern Railway from Ferozepur to Lucknow was stayed.The applicant had alleged that R.S. Ghera, Senior Divisional Commercial Manager, Northern Railway, Ferozepur, was inimical towards him and had conspired with Aslam Mehmood, Chief Commercial Manager, N. Rly, Baroda House, New Delhi, to get the transfer order.
The respondents contended that the applicant was in the habit of making false and frivolous allegations against senior officers. It was submitted that he had been working at Ferozepur for nearly 25 years and the transfer was ordered with the concurrence of cadre controlling authority, with the approval of higher competent authority.
The bench observed that the transfer of the applicant was on the basis of administrative exigencies and
a stay of about 25 years at the same station. It was pointed out that earlier too when he was transferred the applicant had levelled similar allegations against the then divisional railway manager for getting a stay order. It was further observed that if the allegations made against the respondents were false, how the senior officers had ignored his acts which were nothing but acts of insubordination. Vacating the interim stay, the bench recorded that the applicant had managed to get the exparte status quo order on the basis of wrong facts.
Ex-engineer's plea accepted
The CAT bench, comprising vice chairman Justice R.K. Nehru and administrative member S.C. Vaish, accepted assistant engineer (retd), Western Command, S.K. Aggarwal's plea against the non-release of gratuity and commuted portion of his pension.
The applicant submitted that the pensionary benefits were not released under the garb of chargesheet though the inquiry officer had submitted his report exonerating him in 1994. It was
pointed out that the respondent took four years to pass the final order in December, 1997 and with-held the pensionary benefits during the period though he had retired in 1993.
The bench observed that the action of the respondents was extremely unsatisfactory and applicant's claim for costs and interest on delayed payment could not be denied. The respondents were directed to release the benefits with 18 per cent interest and pay litigation cost of Rs 5,000.
It was further ruled that the department would fix the responsibility for delay, and the additional burden imposed on the exchequer for interest would be recovered from the delinquent official and report should be sent to the tribunal.
Copyright © 1998 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.
