O.A.NO.476/10 draft ORAL

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

BANGALORE BENCH:BANGALORE

ORIGINAL APPLICATION NO.476/10

DATED THIS THE EIGHTH DAY OF APRIL, 2011

HON'BLE SMT LEENA MEHENDALE, MEMBER (A)

V.Subramanya,

S/o late R.Veeraraghava Bhatta,

Aged about 59 years,

R/at No.782m 7th Main, 9th Block,

Bangalore - 560 072.                                                                              ....  Applicant

(Shri N.G.Phadke, Advocate)

vs

1.The Union of India,

   Department of Posts,

   Dock Bhavan,

   New Delhi - 110 001

   Represented by its Secretary,

2.The Chief Post Master General,

   Karnataka Circle, Palace Road,

   Bangalore - 560 001.

3.The Senior Superintendent of Posts,

   Bangalore South Division,

   Bangalore - 560 041.                                                                  .....    Respondents

(By Shri M.Swayam Prakash, learned Additional Central Govt. Standing Counsel)

LM(MA)/                                                                                                         D R A F T

08.04.2011

                                                               O.A.NO.476/10               (ORAL)                                

                        Both the counsels are present.  The learned counsel for the applicant submits that the OA has already admitted on 03.12.2010.  He further submits that interim prayer as prayed by him has not yet been granted.  Both the counsels also submit that the reply and rejoinder have already been filed. In the meantime the respondents' department has also issued a charge sheet to the applicant on 22.12.2010 which has been received by the applicant shortly thereafter whereas the applicant claims to have retired on 20.10,2010

                        The learned counsel for the applicant prays for interim stay in terms of para - 9 of the OA to which the learned counsel for the respondents vehemently objects.  Therefore, it is necessary to mention the following facts of the case in brief:

                        The applicant who joined duty at Basavanagudi, Head Post Office as Supervisor on 16.04.2010 and on 19.07.2010 he gave an application for voluntary retirement under Rule - 48 (i)(A) of CCS  Rules 1972 expressing  his intertion to retire from service with effect from  20.10.2010.  The respondents have issued a letter to him dated 09.08.2010 informing that request for retirement under Rule 48 of CCS Rules has not been acceeded to.  The learned counsel for the applicant has pointed out that as per Annexure-A8 Senior Supervisor of Posts  has mentioned in his forwarding letter dated 03.08.2010 to the CPMG (STA), Karnataka Circle i.e. second respondent and it mentions no disciplinary cases are pending or contemplated against the applicant and that the departmental dues to be recovery is Nil.  Under this circumstance the applicant believes that the respondents have no authority to reject his application for voluntary retirement without understanding of the Rule position.  He has discharged his duties upto 19.10.2010and he continued under the presumption that he stands relieved from the service with effect from 20.10.2010.  Accordingly he has stopped attending office from that date and his absence from office has been treated as the ground for issuance of charge memo dated 22.12.2010 at Annexure - A12 wherein the charges are that he absented himself from duty from 20.10,.2010 and another charge is that he failed to attend the work at Basavangud Head Post Office within the directed date i.e. 13.09.2010

                        The learned counsel for the respondents has also requested for final disposal of the OA by giving a short adjournment andboth the counsels agree that the matter may be head and finally disposed on on 18.04.2011.  Accordingly list on 18.04.2011.for such a short period that may takenup for disposal of the matter, interim prayer which askes only the departmental enquiries which has already been started by the respondents since December, 2010 is stayed with effect from today and till the next date of hearing.

                        The learned counsel for the respondents points out that the applicant has only prayed for maintaining statusquo of the interim prayer according to my interpretation of the word 'statusquo' whatever departmental proceedings have taken place till today and have been intimated to the applicant that alone will remain on record and no further departmental proceedings will be takenup as long as interim stay continuies till the next date.  Accordingly adjourned to 18.04.2011.

                        As per the prayer of the learned counsel for the respondents, I have no objection to record his objection to the interim prayer.

                                                                       

                                                                                    (LEENA MEHENDALE)

                                                                                       MEMBER (A)

pm