The Court dismissed a writ petition challenging an order of compulsory retirement against a BSNL employee. The High Court found the departmental proceedings valid and the punishment just, noting the petitioner's unauthorized absence and alcoholism.
Petitioner directed to be paid all statutory benefits if not already disbursed; no costs.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
Dated : 10.03.2016
Coram:
The Honourable Mr.Justice R.SUDHAKAR and The Honourable Mr.Justice S.VAIDYANATHAN
W.P.No.8927 of 2016
J.Narasimhan ...Petitioner
Vs
1 Union of India
Rep. by the Chief General Manager
BSNL - Chennai Telephones
78 Purasawakkam High Road
Chennai-600 010
2 Deputy General Manager
(NOW-C & A SW) CFA
40 E CIPET Road
TVK Industrial Estate
Guindy Chennai-600 032
3 The Divisional Engineer
BSNL - Chennai Telephones
Tambaram Division
NO.9 M.E.S. Road East Tambaram
Chennai-600 059
4 The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Madras Bench
High Court Campus,
Chennai-600 104. ..Respondents
Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution
of India for the issuance of a writ of certiorarified mandamus
to call for the entire records relating to file order passed
by the 4th respondent in O.A.No. 1074 of 2013 dated 15-10-2015
and quash the same and consequently direct the 1st respondent
to reinstate the petitioner and pay the back-wages attendant
benefits and all other statutory service benefits.
For Petitioner : Mr.K.Govindan
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by S.VAIDYANATHAN,J)
The petitioner has come forward with this writ petition, challenging the order of the 4th respondent/Central Administrative Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in O.A.No. 1074 of 2013 dated 15-10-2015 and to consequently direct the 1st respondent to reinstate the petitioner and pay the back-wages, attendant benefits and all other statutory service benefits.
"I, S.Mohan, AGM (NWO), Tambaram, BSNL CDA Rules, 2006, Chennai Telephones being the competent Disciplinary Authority in exercise of powers under Rule 34 of BSNL CDA Rules, 2006 and schedules appended thereto and in accordance with the procedures laid down in Rule 36 and 37 ibid, hereby order COMPULSORY RETIRMENT of the said Shri.J.Narasimhan (HR.No.200006405) Gr. D, from service as per rule 33 B(i) of BSNL CDA Rules-2006 with immediate effect.
It is further ordered that the said official Shri.J.Narasimhan, (HR.No.200006405) Gr. D shall be paid pension and Gratuity as admissible for the pensionable service rendered by him, if any.."
Aggrieved over the same, the petitioner is before this Court.
"For the whole period of absence which extends more than five years, the petitioner had submitted a single medical certificate issued by Dr.T.K.Mohankumar, M.B.B.S., D.A., Sr.Assistant Surgeon, Department of Anesthesiology dated 14.03.2011 which warrants more doubts about the genuineness of the disease as per the discharge summaries submitted. The following doubts have no answer in the above medical certificate.
: No medical certificate/inpatient treatment certificate from any hospital is produced for a long period from 16.12.2006 to 20.02.2009 for a severe problem which prevented the petitioner from not even intimating to the office.
: No medical certificate/inpatient treatment certificate from any hospital is produced for a period from 23.04.200 to 25.07.2009 and 18.08.2009 to 15.12.2010.
: Why the medical certificate for an 'Ortho' problem has not been issued by an 'Ortho' specialist. If the petitioner had taken the treatment from Dr.T.K.Mohankumar, M.B.B.S., D.A., Sr.Assistant Surgeon, Department of Anesthesiology during the period from 06.12.2006 to 20.02.2009 & 23.04.2009 to 25.07.2009 and 18.08.2009 to https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/hcservices/ 15.12.2010, other than the inpatient period at
Govt. Stanley hospital, no material evidence is given. This raises serious doubts about the worthiness of the medical certificate issued by the above doctor on 14.03.2011. : It is quite contradictory that, the serious/grave health problems stated in the discharge summaries dated 22.04.2009 & 17.08.2009 have found no place in the medical certificate visa-vis the health problems stated by the medical certificate issued by Dr.T.K.Mohankumar, M.B.B.S., D.A., Sr. Assistant Surgeon dated 14.03.2011, found no place in the history para of discharge summaries.
On perusal of the medical certificate dated 14.03.2011 from Dr.T.K.Mohankumar, M.B.B.S., D.A., Sr. Assistant Surgeon, Department of Anesthesiology, submitted to the Appellate Authority, it is found that the submission of this document is an after thought.
The copy Discharge summary submitted by the petitioner along with appeal dated 27.06.2012, stipulates his inpatient treatment with Govt. Stanly Hospital, Chennai covers periods from 21.02.2009 to 22.04.2009 & 26.07.2009 to 17.08.2009. His unauthorized absence over a period of five years cannot be justified by taking inpatient treatment for a period of 84 days that too during 2009. He has not produced any material evidence before the Inquiry Officer or to that of the Disciplinary Authority justifying his absence.
Moreover, it is also found from the records that the petitioner was found to be absenting himself on several earlier occasions given below:
27.11.2002 to 29.04.2003 .. 154 days ] 05.05.2003 to 21.12.2003 .. 231 days ] 01.01.2004 to 30.03.2004 .. 90 days ] Total 849 days 01.04.2004 to 24.10.2004 .. 207 days ] 26.10.2004 to 31.10.2004 .. 6 days ] 21.02.2005 to 31.07.2005 .. 161 days ]
It is quite evident that, during the above three year spell, the petitioner is absent for almost two and half years. This shows the most irregular attendance and his least bothered mentality towards duty. Further, for all the above leave periods, no prior intimation/leave letter was given. All are unauthorized absents".
procedure adopted is in compliance of the principles of natural justice. Sufficient proof was given and explanation was considered and by a reasoned order, the impugned proceedings have been passed. Therefore, we are of the view that there is no reason to challenge the same, alleging irregularity or impropriety in the proceedings. So far as the factual aspect is concerned, there are no genuine reasons for the petitioner's absence for the period from 2005-2008, as records speak only for the period from February 2009 to August 2009 for taking treatment. The petitioner would not have absented himself from duty without prior permission had he been a workaholic. But, unfortunately, he is a known Alcoholic/Smoker as could be seen from the Discharge Summary, dated 21.02.2009, issued by Institute of Surgical Gastroenterology & Liver Transplant, Chennai.
Sd/-
Assistant Registrar(CS III)
//True Copy//
Sub Assistant Registrar
rg
To:
1 The Chief General Manager
Union of India
BSNL - Chennai Telephones
78 Purasawakkam High Road
Chennai-600 010
2 Deputy General Manager
(NOW-C & A SW) CFA
40 E CIPET Road TVK Industrial Estate
Guindy Chennai-600 032.
3 The Divisional Engineer
BSNL - Chennai Telephones
Tambaram Division
NO.9 M.E.S. Road East Tambaram
Chennai-600 059.
4 The Registrar
Central Administrative Tribunal
Madras Bench High Court Campus Chennai-600 104
+1cc to Mr.K. Govindan, Advocate, S.R.No.15389
BVR(CO)
EU(24/03/2016)
W.P.No.8927 of 2016
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the order of compulsory retirement passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal requires allowance.
Whether the procedural adoption by the department comported with the principles of natural justice.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to reinstatement and back-wages given the nature of unauthorized absence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
J.Narasimhan
Union of India Rep. by the Chief General Manager BSNL - Chennai Telephones
Deputy General Manager (NOW-C & A SW) CFA
The Divisional Engineer BSNL - Chennai Telephones Tambaram Division
The Registrar Central Administrative Tribunal Madras Bench
R.SUDHAKAR
S.VAIDYANATHAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
