R C Nigam (xxxxxxxxx) 27 May 2011

If u r made a member of CAT

U have 2 decide the following case:

A petitioner comes 2 CAT with facts as narrated here, " I am a Rly employee. I fell sick and remained under treatment of Rly Divl Med Officer. On recovery, certificate of FITNESS was submitted on 12.5.89, with intimation to join duty on and from 13.5.89. I actually joined accordingly on Sat the 13th and was continuing daily. An instruction was recorded on the Diary on 16.5.89 that the Divl Engr had issued verbal order restraining me from performing duty. I met the Divl Engr on 16.5.89, after finishing duty, who asked me 2 apply 4 a few days leave, which I did, and it was forwarded by him 2 the Personel Officer. My requests 4 duty were ignored. After a year an order was issued telling that I had reported after long sickness, and was being transfered and posted at Faizabad. I demanded full salary of the period, when a meager amount, against my leave, was paid to me in 1993, consuming my leave.

The petition was against this arbitrary action of the Divl Rly Manager. Photocopies of the large number of representations, requesting duty, were attached with the petition along with the leave application dated 16.5.89.

The Divl Rly Mgr replied that the petitioner had absconded after submitting the FIT certificate for almost a year, hence not entitled 4 salary.

The learned CAT passed order: The DRM who has neither accepted nor denied the receipt of the large number of representations of the petitioner, asserts that the petitioner absconded, is, hereby, directed to reconsider the petitioner's claim

It may also b noted that the Rly Rule is 2 take up an employee if he absconds 4 more than 3 days, but I was not taken up even 4 a yrs' absense, and the Rules also lay down 4 medical exam 4 such a long absense, which was also not followed.

WHAT WUD HAVE BEEN UR JUDGMENT AS A MEMBER OF THE CAT?

Reply Follow

4 Replies

hema (law officer) 27 May 2011

First it has to be seen that the case is filed within the limitation period. if yes, then the case follows on merit. the administration is alleging the employee absconded (actually the appropriate expression shall be abandoned) and the onus is on the administration to prove the charge of abandonment. to prove this charge, the admn. should show the court the memos issued on the last known address of the employee and in the event of non-receipt, go for paper publication and later on hold departmental enquiry and declare that he has abandoned his services. In the meantime, the employee has got abundant evidence to prove that he has been at regular intervals is asking the admn. for his services. The application of the employee, in my opinion, shall be allowed.

R C Nigam (xxxxxxxxx) 28 May 2011

Dear Hema,

My petition was within the limitation period, and only, therefore, entertained by the CAT.

No step/action, as reqd and mentioned by u was taken by the DRM/NR/Luck, while I had submitted large number of applications/representations, requesting 2 b allowed to join duty.

As recorded in the Judgment that the Respondent neither accepted nor denied the fact about the petitioner's applications for duty, does it mean concealment of material facts in his reply by the DRM, the respondent?

Do such Judgments call 4 drastic action against the CAT's member, 2 avoid reccurance? Can the provision of an ambudsman improve the matters? Is there any other solution?

hema (law officer) 28 May 2011

if the judgement has gone against the applicant and the applicant could not get the desired relief, the appropriate action is to file an appeal (writ before the division bench of the concerned High Court against CAT judgment) within 90 days (ordinarily) of the passing of the CAT judgment.

S (Hr mgr) 28 May 2011

I think it is the mistake of an employee when he was on duty for FIOUR DAYS he should not have filled in leave form.

He have the evidence to prove that he wanted to join the duty which was ignored by his immidiate superior. he should have approached to the DRM.

When the learned CAT passed order: The DRM who has neither accepted nor denied the receipt of the large number of representations of the petitioner, asserts that the petitioner absconded ? is, hereby, directed to reconsider the petitioner's claim?

I feel the CAT must come out from the cage and see/ verify the documentry evidence produced before them and must call the DRM if he is not obeying the order of the CAT.

I feel that best action is to file a writ before the division bench of the concerned High Court against CAT judgment within 90 days ordinarily of the passing of the CAT judgment.

1 Like