{"id":179053,"date":"2005-08-11T00:00:00","date_gmt":"2005-08-10T18:30:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005"},"modified":"2014-11-13T03:56:09","modified_gmt":"2014-11-12T22:26:09","slug":"union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005","title":{"rendered":"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005"},"content":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court<\/div>\n
Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005<\/div>\n
       \n\n  \n\n  \n\n \n \n IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS           \n\nDATED: 11\/08\/2005  \n\nCORAM   \n\nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE P.SATHASIVAM         \nand \nTHE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AR.RAMALINGAM          \n\nW.P.No.7220 of 2002  \n\n1. Union of India rep. by\n   The Additional Director General\n   AV HQ, Avadi, Chennai 600 054. \n\n2. The Sr. General Manager \n   Heavy Vehicles Factory\n   Avadi, Chennai 600 054.                      .. Petitioners\n\n\n-Vs-\n\n1. The Central Administrative Tribunal\n   rep. by its Registrar\n   High Court Buildings\n   Chennai 600 104.\n\n2. M. Annamalai                                 .. Respondents\n\n\n                Petitions filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India\npraying for an issuance of a writ of certiorari mandamus as stated therein.\n\nFor petitioners :  Mr.  S.M.  Deenadayalan\n                A.C.G.S.C.\n\nFor respondents :  Mr.  R.  Singaravelan for R.2\n\n\n:ORDER  \n<\/pre>\n
(ORDER of the Court was made by P.SATHASIVAM,J.)      <\/p>\n
                Aggrieved by the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal,
\nMadras Bench, dated 11.09.2001 made in O.A.No.40 of 2001, quashing  the  order
\nof  compulsory  retirement  and  reinstating the applicant in service with all
\nconsequential benefits, Additional Director  General  and  Senior  Manager  of
\nHeavy  Vehicles  Factory,  Avadi,  Chennai  600 054, have filed the above writ
\npetition.\n<\/p>\n
                2.  The brief facts which are required  for  disposal  of  the
\nwrit petition are stated hereunder:\n<\/p>\n
                The second respondent herein, viz., M.  Annamalai, was working
\nas  Medical Assistant, Heavy Vehicles Factory (in short “HVF”), Avadi, Chennai
\n600 054.  A report  dated  16.12.1996  was  received  from  Principal  Medical
\nOfficer  (in short “PMO”), HVF Hospital along with the complaint of one Mumtaj
\nBegum, female attendant to  an  in-patient  in  male  medical  ward  regarding
\nalleged misbehaviour by  M.   Annamalai, Medical Assistant.  In her complaint,
\nMumtaj Begum has stated that on 13.12.1996  night  at  about  9.00  p.m.    M.
\nAnnamalai,  Medical  Attendant  called  her  to  the  sisters’  duty  room for
\ncollecting tablets for the patient.  When she went there,  instead  of  giving
\ntablets,  he told her that he had developed some fascination for her and asked
\nher whether she is willing to fulfill his desire.  She objected to his request
\nand warned that he should not behave with her in such a  manner.    Then,  the
\nsaid  Annamalai  offered  her  a  50\/- rupee note and also assured her that he
\nwould give her more if she require.  She went off from  there  and  lied  down
\nnext to  the  patient  on  the  cot.   At about 01.00 a.m., she felt her saree
\nmoving up her legs.  She woke up alarmed and found that Annamalai was standing
\nnear the cot, pushing her saree.  She shouted at him and asked him to get out.
\nThere was one more patient in the  room,  viz.,  Krishnan  and  his  attendant
\nAndal.   Mumtaj  Begum  did  not  report the matter to the duty Sister or duty
\nMedical Officer,  because  of  fear  and  shame.    The  next  day,  i.e.,  on
\n14.12.1996,  she  disclosed  the  matter  to her family members and later they
\ninformed the Duty Sister of the male medical ward, who in  turn  informed  the
\nMedical Officer on duty.\n<\/p>\n
                3.   Based  on  the  report  of  PMO, HVF Hospital, as per the
\ncomplaint received  from  Mumtaj  Begum,  M.    Annamalai  was  placed   under
\nsuspension  with  effect  from  20.12.1996 and was subsequently charge sheeted
\nunder Rule 14 of Central  Civil  Service  (Classification  Control  &  Appeal)
\nRules,  1965, for committing offence of misconduct, viz., alleged misbehaviour
\nwith female attendant of an in-patient, attempt  to  outrage  the  modesty  to
\nMumtaj  Begum,  and  conduct  unbecoming  of  a Government servant as per Rule
\n3(1)(iii) of CCS (Conduct Rules), 1964.\n<\/p>\n
                4.  The said Annamalai denied the charges in his  reply  dated
\n13.03.1 997; a Court of Enquiry was ordered on 07.04.1997, to enquire into the
\ncharges framed against him.  The Enquiry Officer, after conducting the enquiry
\nin accordance  with the Rules, submitted his proceedings.  The Enquiry Officer
\nconcluded that the charges framed against him were established.  A copy of the
\nenquiry report was forwarded to Annamalai on 17.12.1997, directing him to make
\nany representation.   Thereafter,  he  submitted  a   representation.      The
\nDisciplinary  Authority  – General Manager, HVF, after examining the reply and
\nin the light of the documentary evidences available on record, concurred  with
\nthe findings of the Enquiry Officer and held M.Annamalai guilty of the charges
\nframed against  him.    Since  the  charges were of a serious nature of sexual
\nharassment  involving  the  moral  turpitude  of  the  employee,  Disciplinary
\nAuthority, imposed the penalty of “dismissal from service” w.e.f.  03.3.1998.\n<\/p>\n
                5.Aggrieved  by  the  order  of  dismissal, the said Annamalai
\nsubmitted an appeal dated 19.03.1998 to the  appellate  authority,  viz.,  the
\nAdditional Director   General   (AV  HQ).    The  appellate  authority,  after
\nconsidering the appeal with reference to the relevant records,  dismissed  his
\nappeal.  Meanwhile, Mumtaj Begum filed a criminal complaint against Annamalai.
\nBy  order  dated 08.07.1998, Judicial Magistrate No.I, Poonamallee in C.C.No.2
\nof 1999 acquitted him on the  basis  of  doubt.    The  said  Annamalai  filed
\nO.A.No.682  of  1998  before  the  Central  Administrative  Tribunal,  Chennai
\nchallenging the orders of the disciplinary authority dated 03.03.1998 and  the
\nappellate authority  dated  30.06.1998 .  The Central Administrative Tribunal,
\nby order dated 18.04.2000, set aside the order of the appellate authority  and
\nremitted the matter back to him for reconsideration.  The appellate authority,
\nreconsidered  the  matter and modified the penalty of “dismissal from service”
\nto “compulsory retirement” by order dated 05.09.2000.   Questioning  the  said
\norder  of compulsory retirement, the said Annamalai filed another O.A.No.40 of
\n2001 before the Central Administrative Tribunal.  By the impugned  order,  the
\nTribunal  allowed the said application on 11.09.20 01 on the ground that there
\nis no evidence to substantiate the charge.  Aggrieved by the  above  decision,
\nthe Department has filed the present writ petition.\n<\/p>\n
                6.  Heard Mr.   S.M.  Deenadayalan, learned Additional Central
\nGovernment Standing counsel for petitioners and Mr.  R.  Singaravelan, learned
\ncounsel for the second respondent.\n<\/p>\n
                7.  The points for consideration in this writ petition are,<\/p>\n
(i) Whether the Department has proved the charges leveled against  the  second
\nrespondent  herein  and  the  ultimate  punishment  imposed  by  the appellate
\nauthority is sustainable?\n<\/p>\n
(ii) Whether the Central Administrative Tribunal is justified in holding  that
\nit is a case of “no evidence” and setting aside the order of punishment?\n<\/p>\n
                8.   In  view of narration of facts in the earlier part of our
\norder, there is no need to refer the same once again.    The  reading  of  the
\nimpugned  order  shows  that since the complainant, viz., Mumtaj Begum was not
\nexamined before the Enquiry Officer and no other eye witness was  examined  to
\nprove  the  alleged incident, the Tribunal, after finding that it is a case of
\n“no evidence”, set aside the modified punishment, viz., compulsory  retirement
\nand allowed  the  application  of the applicant\/second respondent herein.  The
\nlearned Additional Central  Government  standing  counsel  appearing  for  the
\npetitioners\/HVF,  by  drawing our attention to the enquiry proceedings and the
\nreport of the Enquiry Officer submitted that though the  complainant  was  not
\nexamined,  the  Department  basing reliance on her compliant dated 14.12.1996,
\nexamined  Dr.U.Revathi,  STMO,  HVF  Hospital  as  PW.1   and   Smt.Therasamma
\nGirijanath as Pws.2.   On the side of the delinquent, viz., M.  Annamalai, one
\nAndal was examined as DW.1, Jeevajothi, Senior Nurse, HVF Hospital as DW.2, M.
\nMurugan, Ward Sahayak as DW.3 and M.  Annamalai, Medical  Assistant\/delinquent
\nhimself as DW.4.\n<\/p>\n
                9.It further shows that PW.1 – Dr.U.Revathi was not on duty on
\n13.1 2.1996.  But as PW.1 she deposed that she came to know about the incident
\nat  13.00 hours on 14.12.1996 and also stated that she received oral complaint
\nfrom S.  Mumtaj Begum on the next day of the incident, viz., 14.12.1996.   She
\nnarrated the  complaint  made by Mumtaj Begum before the Enquiry Officer.  The
\nfollowing question and answer given by PW.1 are relevant.\n<\/p>\n
“12.  Q.  Whether your statement was based on the statement of Smt.S.   Mumtaj
\nBegam?\n<\/p>\n
Ans.  Yes.  My statement was based on the statement of Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam.
\nShe narrated the incident to me and later to Dr.B.Rajendran, PMO, HVF Hospital
\nwhile I was also present on 14.12.1996 at 1900 hrs.<\/p>\n
17.  Q.  When did Smt.S.Mumtaj Begam narrate the incident?
\nAns.  Smt.   S.    Mumtaj  Begam  narrated the incident first on 14.12.1996 at
\n13.00 hrs.  to me.\n<\/p>\n
18.  Q.  Who were all present in the room while she narrated the incident?
\nAns.  Dr.  B.  Rajendran, PMO, Myself, Smt.  S.  Mumtaj  Begam,  were  present
\nwhen she narrated it again at 1900 hrs on 14.12.1996.\n<\/p>\n
19.  Q.  How Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam appeared during her narration?
\nAns.  Her face appeared emotional.  She had already narrated the incident 2 to
\n3 times.  First  time  she narrated to Smt.  Therasamma Girijanath, Sr.  Nurse
\nand second time narrated to myself at 13.00 hrs.  on 14 .12.96 and third  time
\nnarrated the same incident  to  Dr.    B.    Rajendran,  PMO at 19.00 hrs.  on
\n14.12.96.\n<\/p>\n
21.  Q.  When Smt.  Andal was enquired what was stated by Mrs.  Andal?
\nAns.  Smt.  Andal was also enquired  on  14.12.1996  at  19.00  hrs.    in  my
\npresence by Dr.  D.    Rajendran,  PMO.  Smt.  Andal said that she did not see
\nthe incident as she was having poor eye sights.  She also  narrated  that  she
\ndid not hear  the  exact  words  of the shout of Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam in the
\nnight and she told that she did not notice anybody running away.    She  added
\nthat Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam was crying and she narrated that Shri M.  Anamalai
\ncame near and  he lifted her saree and hence Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam shouted at
\nhim to get out from that room.\n<\/p>\n
25.Q.  Ms.  Andal told what exact words used by Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam?
\nAns.  She heard as if Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam shouted at somebody  to  get  out
\nfrom the room and she got up from the bed.\n<\/p>\n
31.Q.   Can  you comment about the incident whether it was a minor incident or
\nsomething major happened as per her statement?\n<\/p>\n
Ans.  She looked upset and the statement seems to be consistent.  She narrated
\nthe same incident twice.   Once  she  told  me  on  14.12.1996  and  again  on
\n14.12.1996 while enquired by Dr.  B.  Rajendran, PMO at 190 0 hrs.<\/p>\n
37.  Q.  When  Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam reported in oral about the incident, did
\nyou ask her why she had not reported at least in oral or  in  writing  to  the
\nDuty Doctor or the Duty Nurse on the night itself?\n<\/p>\n
Ans.  I asked this  question with Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam.  She stated that she
\ndid not report the matter to the Duty Doctor or the Duty  Nurse  on  the  same
\nnight, as  she  was  ashamed of because of the incident.  However she informed
\nabout the incident to her brother and as per the advise  of  her  brother  she
\nreported  the  matter to the Duty Nurse as well as the Duty Doctor on the very
\nnext day (i.e.  14.12.1996).\n<\/p>\n
40.  Q.  You have stated that Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam has narrated the incident
\nwith emotional condition.  Guilty conscious persons also look emotional.   Can
\nyou comment?\n<\/p>\n
Ans.  She  wept,  and  she was crying.  That much only I could observe on that
\nday.  ”\n<\/p>\n
Finally, in respect of  question  No.66  by  the  Enquiry  Officer,  PW.1  has
\nnarrated about the incident as complained by S.  Mumtaj Begum.\n<\/p>\n
                10.PW.2  though  not present on the date of incident, i.e., on
\n13.12.1996, she informed the Enquiry Officer that father of  the  patient  has
\ntold about  the  incident.    After  getting the information, she reported the
\nmatter to the duty Medical Officer.  The following question and answer  before
\nEnquiry Officer are relevant.\n<\/p>\n
“74.  Q.  Whether  Smt.    S.  Mumtaj Begam narrated the incident or the boy’s
\nfather narrated the incident?\n<\/p>\n
Ans.  Both narrated the incident to me.\n<\/p>\n
76.  Q.  Please tell the exact words used by Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam?
\nAns.  Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam narrated to me as follows:\n<\/p>\n
        She was called by Shri M.  Annamalai, Medical Assistant to  the  Night
\nduty sisters  room  for  giving  medicines  to the patient.  When she went for
\ngetting medicines he tried to give her Rs.50\/- and told her  if  she  required
\nmore money he would  give.   Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam refused that and went back
\nto male medical ward.   She  had  slept  with  the  patient.    Then  Shri  M.
\nAnnamalai,  Medical Assistant came and touched her leg then she shouted at him
\nthen he went out.  ”\n<\/p>\n
                11.  The enquiry proceedings further show that both  PW.1  and
\nPW.2 were subjected to cross examination by the delinquent.  The first defence
\nwitness  Andal,  is  an attendant of the patient next to the bed of patient of
\nS.Mumtaj Begum.  She admitted the presence of S.Mumtaj Begum and  her  nephew,
\non the  relevant  date  i.e., on 13.12.1996.  Though she was examined as DW.1,
\nthe following question and answer supports the case of the complainant,  viz.,
\nS.  Mumtaj Begum.\n<\/p>\n
96.  Q.  What  narration  was made by Smt.  S.  Mumtaj Begam about the alleged
\nincident in the night on 13.12.1996?\n<\/p>\n
Ans.  In the morning around 05.00 to 06.00  hrs.    on  14.12.1996  Smt.    S.
\nMumtaj Begam  was  weeping  and  started  narrating  that  shri M.  Annamalai,
\nMedical Assistant tried to outrage her Modesty in the previous night.  When  I
\nquestioned her that why she did not tell about the incident to me at that time
\nitself, she  replied  that she did not want to disturb me.  I stated that Shri
\nM.  Annamalai, Medical Assistant would have not done such a thing because Shri
\nM.  Annamalai, Medical Assistant had distributed medicines in the next morning
\nto my husband and her nephew.  ”\n<\/p>\n
In the later part, she admitted that in her earlier statement “I was  fall  in
\nsleep  in  that night, heard a noise from Smt.S.Mumtaj Begum, I woke up, but i
\ndid not find anybody.” It is clear that she was sleeping in the next  bed  and
\nshe heard noise  from  S.    Mumtaj  Begum.  Though she denied the presence of
\nAnnamalai, the evidence of DW.1 prove the presence  of  Mumtaj  Begum  in  the
\nhospital  on  13.12.1996  and  also  she confirmed that she woke up on hearing
\nalarm from Mumtaj Begum.\n<\/p>\n
                12.Even DW.2 Ward Sahayak, has admitted that  around  9.00  to
\n10.00 p.m.   on  13.12.1996, S.Mumtaj Begum went behind M.  Annamalai, Medical
\nAssistant for getting medicine.  Though he did  not  say  anything  about  the
\nincident  as  claimed in the complaint, he admitted the fact that Mumtaj Begum
\nwent along with Annamalai, Medical Assistant for getting medicine.\n<\/p>\n
                13.  An analysis of the materials placed  before  the  Enquiry
\nOfficer  shows  that though the complainant Mumtaj Begum was not examined, the
\ndetails of the complaint would show, she had explained the incident  that  had
\ntaken place on 13.12.1996 and that was clearly explained by witnesses who were
\nexamined on  the  side  of  the Department.  Even the defence witnesses though
\ndenied the manner of incident  as  claimed  in  the  complaint,  admitted  the
\npresence of Mumtaj Begum in a male ward and staying along with her nephew, who
\nis taking treatment for snake bite.\n<\/p>\n
                14.It  is  also  brought to our notice that the delinquent had
\nnot made any plea for not examining the  complainant.    Further,  as  rightly
\npointed  out  in  an incident as sensitive as this, it is not advisable to ask
\nthe complainant to come and depose as well as narrate the events, which  would
\nonly embarrass  her.    It  is  not  in  dispute that she had given a detailed
\nstatement and her statement was used  as  evidence  in  departmental  enquiry.
\nMerely because the complainant was not examined before the Enquiry Officer, in
\na  sexual  harassment  case, it cannot be construed that the enquiry report is
\nvitiated particularly in the light of the evidence of PW.1  -Duty  Doctor  and
\nPW.2 – Duty Nurse.\n<\/p>\n
                15.The   disciplinary  authority  as  well  as  the  appellate
\nauthority considered the two main witnesses, viz.,  Dr.U.Revathi,  STMO  (PW1)
\nand  Therasamma Girijanath, Senior Nurse Grade II (PW2) were examined from the
\nside of the Department and vital document, viz.,  complaint  given  by  Mumtaj
\nBegum  dated 16.12.1996 to the Principal Medical Officer as well as the report
\nof PMO were taken into consideration before coming to  the  final  conclusion.
\nIn  such a circumstance, we are of the view that the Tribunal has committed an
\nerror in arriving a conclusion that it is a case of “no evidence”  before  the
\nEnquiry Officer.    On  the  other hand, as rightly pointed out by the learned
\nAdditional Central Government standing counsel, the  statement  of  the  above
\nmentioned  prosecution  witnesses and the content of the documents relied upon
\nby the Enquiry Officer  could  not  be  brushed  aside,  particularly  in  the
\npeculiar nature of the allegations made.\n<\/p>\n
                16.It  is  settled  legal  position  that  in  a  departmental
\nproceeding, the requirement of strict evidence under Indian Evidence  Act  are
\nnot applicable.  In a Departmental enquiry, the guilt can be arrived at on the
\npreponderance of  probability.   The appreciation of evidence is the exclusive
\ndomain of the disciplinary authority, to consider the evidence on  record  and
\nto render  findings,  whether  charges  have  been proved or not.  In judicial
\nreview, the Court or Tribunal has no power to traverse upon  the  jurisdiction
\nand to  arrive its own conclusion.  Inasmuch as the Tribunal has concluded “it
\nis a case of no evidence before the Enquiry Officer”, we verified  the  entire
\nenquiry  report and extracted the relevant portions in the earlier part of our
\norder to show that  there  were  sufficient  materials  on  the  side  of  the
\nDepartment,  even  though  the  complainant  did not depose before the Enquiry
\nOfficer.  Further, it is  seen  that  in  the  disciplinary  proceedings,  the
\ndelinquent  had  also  not asked for examination or cross examination or raise
\nany objection for the absence of complainant during the course of enquiry.\n<\/p>\n
                17.  It is the claim of the delinquent that  even  though  the
\nalleged  misconduct  committed  by him is said to have happened on 13.12.1996,
\nthe complainant S.  Mumtaj Begum had not complained about  this  to  the  Duty
\nDoctor  or  to  the  Duty Nurse on the same day and according to him this will
\ndemonstrate the falsity of the complaint.  As discussed  above,  and  as  seen
\nfrom  the  evidence of Pws.1 and 2 as well as in the complaint, merely because
\nshe did not inform the incident on the same night, it cannot be concluded that
\nthere is no truth in  it,  particularly  in  the  light  of  admitted  factual
\nposition,  viz.,  the  presence  of the complainant in the male ward since her
\nnephew was taking treatment for snake bite and also the witnesses examined  on
\nthe  side  of the defence to the same effect as well as the fact that she went
\nalong with the delinquent for collection of medicine.  It  is  also  available
\nfrom  the  enquiry report that the delinquent M.Annamalai himself has accepted
\nthat he has called Mumtaj Begum to the sisters’ duty room for giving  medicine
\nand  one  Murugan,  Ward  Boy during the examination by the Enquiry Officer as
\ndefence witness has also stated that Mumtaj Begum went behind M.    Annamalai,
\nMedical  Assistant  for  getting  medicine to the sister’s duty room where the
\nmedicines are available.  As discussed earlier, the  another  defence  witness
\nAndal  admitted  that  she  heard the shouting of Mumtaj Begum in the night of
\n13.12.1996.  Though there  is  no  direct  witness  to  state  that  the  said
\nAnnamalai  misbehaved  with Mumtaj Begum in the night of 13.12.1996, a perusal
\nof the entire materials leads to an inference that such an incident had  taken
\nplace on the misbehaviour of S.Annamalai.\n<\/p>\n
                18.  It is unfortunate that the Tribunal has expressed that no
\neye witness  to  the  incident  was  examined before the Enquiry Officer.  The
\nTribunal has failed to take note that in the case  of  sexual  harassment  the
\ncomplaint  \/  statement  of  the  lady should be considered in the real spirit
\nsince normally no decent lady will make such complaint or  allegation  against
\nany  man about the sexual harassment, as it may have disadvantage to her life,
\nstatus in  the  society.    Courts  have  to  dispel  a   greater   sense   of
\nresponsibility  and  to  be  more sensitive while charges of sexual assault on
\nwoman.\n<\/p>\n
                19.  The order of the  disciplinary  authority  further  shows
\nthat  since the charges are of serious nature involving moral turpitude of the
\nemployee and finding that he is unfit to continue  as  a  Government  servant,
\nimposed a penalty of dismissal from service.  It is also relevant to note that
\nthe  appellate  authority  though  initially  confirmed the order of dismissal
\npassed by the original authority, on direction by the  Central  Administrative
\nTribunal  in  O.A.No.682  of 1998, reconsidered the matter afresh and modified
\nthe penalty of “dismissal from service” to “compulsory  retirement”  by  order
\ndated 05.09.2000.    In  such  a circumstance, in a matter like this, when the
\nOfficer had an opportunity to participate in the enquiry  by  cross  examining
\nthe  Departmental  witnesses and adducing defence witnesses and when all these
\nrelevant materials were considered by the original authority before imposition
\nof punishment, affirmed by the appellate authority, we are of  the  view  that
\ninterference by  the  Tribunal  \/  Court is very limited.  It is the exclusive
\ndomain of the disciplinary authority to consider the evidence  on  record  and
\nfinding whether  charges  have  been  proved  or  not.  The technical rules of
\nevidence has no application in the disciplinary proceedings.  In the light  of
\nthe  above  principles  and the materials placed before the Enquiry Officer as
\nwell as the orders of the original and appellate  authority,  we  are  of  the
\nconsidered  view  that  the  Tribunal;  has  committed serious error of law in
\nappreciation of the evidence and coming to its own conclusion that the charges
\nhad not been proved.\n<\/p>\n
                In the light of our discussion, the  impugned  proceedings  of
\nthe  Central  Administrative  Tribunal, Chennai Bench dated 11.09.2001 made in
\nO.A.No.40 of 2001 is quashed and the writ petition is allowed.  No costs.\n<\/p>\n
Index:Yes
\nInternet:Yes<\/p>\n
kh<\/p>\n
To
\nThe Registrar
\nCentral Administrative Tribunal
\nHigh Court Buildings
\nChennai 600 104.\n<\/p><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Madras High Court Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED: 11\/08\/2005 CORAM THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE P.SATHASIVAM and THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE AR.RAMALINGAM W.P.No.7220 of 2002 1. Union of India rep. by The Additional Director General AV HQ, Avadi, Chennai 600 […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_lmt_disableupdate":"","_lmt_disable":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[8,13],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-179053","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-high-court","category-madras-high-court"],"yoast_head":"\nUnion Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative ... on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative ... on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2014-11-12T22:26:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"512\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@legaliadmin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:site\" content=\"@Legal_india\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Legal India Admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"18 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\"},\"headline\":\"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005\",\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-12T22:26:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\"},\"wordCount\":3442,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"articleSection\":[\"High Court\",\"Madras High Court\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\",\"name\":\"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative ... on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2014-11-12T22:26:09+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"name\":\"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"description\":\"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\"},\"alternateName\":\"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\",\"alternateName\":\"Legal India\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/5\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/legal-india-icon.jpg\",\"width\":512,\"height\":512,\"caption\":\"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/LegalindiaCom\\\/\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Legal_india\"]},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea\",\"name\":\"Legal India Admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Legal India Admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/legaliadmin\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/www.legalindia.com\\\/judgments\\\/author\\\/legal-india-admin\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative ... on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative ... on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","og_url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005","og_site_name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","article_published_time":"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","article_modified_time":"2014-11-12T22:26:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":512,"height":512,"url":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg?fit=512%2C512&ssl=1","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Legal India Admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@legaliadmin","twitter_site":"@Legal_india","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Legal India Admin","Est. reading time":"18 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005"},"author":{"name":"Legal India Admin","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea"},"headline":"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005","datePublished":"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-12T22:26:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005"},"wordCount":3442,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"articleSection":["High Court","Madras High Court"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005","name":"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative ... on 11 August, 2005 - Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website"},"datePublished":"2005-08-10T18:30:00+00:00","dateModified":"2014-11-12T22:26:09+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/union-of-india-rep-by-vs-the-central-administrative-on-11-august-2005#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Union Of India Rep. By vs The Central Administrative … on 11 August, 2005"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","name":"Free Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","description":"Search and read the latest judgements, orders, and rulings from the Supreme Court of India and all High Courts. A comprehensive database for lawyers, advocates, and law students.","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization"},"alternateName":"Free judgements of Supreme Court & High Court of India | Legal India","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#organization","name":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India","alternateName":"Legal India","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/5\/2025\/09\/legal-india-icon.jpg","width":512,"height":512,"caption":"Judgements of Supreme Court & High Court | Legal India"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LegalindiaCom\/","https:\/\/x.com\/Legal_india"]},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/#\/schema\/person\/0bfdffe9059fb8bb24a86d094609c5ea","name":"Legal India Admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/4faa9d728ed1af3b73d52225c7f12901ac726fe6f7ea0a3348a1d51f3a930987?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Legal India Admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.legalindia.com","https:\/\/x.com\/legaliadmin"],"url":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/author\/legal-india-admin"}]}},"modified_by":null,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_likes_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179053","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=179053"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/179053\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=179053"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=179053"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.legalindia.com\/judgments\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=179053"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}