A.S. Sastry vs Chief Commnr. Of Income Tax & Ors
- SCC(2007) 9 SCC 41
- Neutral2007 INSC 322
- AIRAIR 2007 SC Supp 467
- SCR[2007] 4 SCR 245
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where a retired government employee has been in a pending departmental inquiry for an extended period and has challenged the charges before the Central Administrative Tribunal, the Tribunal's refusal to grant expedited hearing merely on the ground that a large number of matters are pending prior to the applicant's case is not a sufficient or acceptable reason to deny priority consideration, particularly where the employee has already superannuated. A court directing expeditious disposal of proceedings before an administrative tribunal carries an implicit direction that the tribunal should take up such cases on a priority basis and dispose of them within a reasonable and specified timeframe, which in cases of retired employees facing extended inquiries should be shortened to ensure finality. Where a High Court has directed that pension be paid during the pendency of an inquiry, and such direction has not been complied with, the appellate court will enforce that direction by ordering immediate payment of all arrears of pension accrued after retirement and continuance of such pension payments.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
Heard Mr.T.L.V.Iyer, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Gp.Capt.Karn Singh Bhatti, learned counsel for the respondents. We have perused the order impugned in this appeal. According to the appellant, he is retired from service on 30.11.2005. He is facing a departmental inquiry and the same is pending for a very long time without being finally disposed of. He has also challenged the charges framed against him and the said case is also pending before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderbad. Before the High Court, he also made a prayer for expeditious disposal of the matter pending before the Central Administrative Tribunal. The High Court directed the Central Administrative Tribunal to consider the request made by the appellant and dispose of the matter at an early date. Thereafter, an application was filed before the Tribunal to expedite hearing which was disposed of on 20.03.2006 stating that there were large number of matters pending prior to the OA filed by the appellant and, at that stage, it was not inclined to grant early hearing in the matter and that the applicant may renew his request for early hearing after three months. This order was passed by the Tribunal on 20.03.2006. The reasoning given by the Tribunal for not taking up the matter at an early date is not acceptable to us. The appellant has already superannuated on 30.11.2005. We, therefore, direct the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad to take up OA No.788/2005 on priority basis and dispose of the same within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order from this Court.
The High Court also while disposing of the Writ Petition directed the respondent herein to pay the pension during the pendency of inquiry. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the said direction has not been complied with. We, therefore, direct the respondent to immediately arrange to pay the entire arrears of pension after retirement and continue to pay the same.
Learned counsel for the appellant states that even though a request has already been made to travel abroad, i.e., to U.S.A. to see the members of his family but the same was not accepted during the pendency of the proceedings. If the matter is not disposed of within two months as directed by us now, the appellant may also make an application to the Tribunal seeking permission to travel abroad and if such an application is filed, the same shall be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law.
The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
No costs.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free