R. PARANGUSAM ETC. v. CHIEF ELECTRICAL INSPECTOR AND ANR.
vidhipandit.com/case/sc-s-1996-3-801-802
Headnote — Supreme Court Reports (editorial summary, not part of the judgment)
Reporter's headnote (continued) and case details
JULY 22, 1996
B
Se1vice La1v--{~01111ntlso1y rctire111ent-Order set aside b.v Tribunal and 111atter ren1ittcd lo (/ni,'crJvncnt for conducting enqui1y ajtcr giving oppo1tu11ity to employce--Orde1s for flxarion of pension-Held in vieiv of !he facl tlwr employee had already re/ired direction for fresh enquily was not called C for-Order of T1ibunal set asid~Dircclion to consider eniployee's pron1otion at par }'Vi th juniors pronzoted during enquily--lf found eliJ,rible pronzotion should he granted ivith consequential benefits.
CIVIL APPELLATE .TURJSDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 9863 of 1996 Etc. D From the Judgment aml Order datet! 18.12.92 of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras in 0.A. No. 2423 of 1990.
C.S. Vaidyanathan for the Appellant. E V. Krishnamurthy for the Respondents.
Judgment
The following Order of the Court was delivered :
Delay condoned. F Leave granted.
We requested Shri C.S. Vaidyanathan, learned senior counsel to assist the appellant. We have heard the arguments for the State and also Mr. C.S. Vaidyanathan. The Tribunal in the impugned order, while setting G aside the order of compubory retirement from service, remitted the matter to the Ci-ovcrn1nent to conduct the enquiry afresh after giving opportunity to the appellant and based thereon to pass appropriate orders for fixation of the pension etc. It is not in dispute that the appellant has already retired fron1 service. It is also not in dispute that the advances dra\vn for construc- tion of the hou~e, allot1nent of the house in the name of his wife by Housing H 801
802 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1996} SUPP. 3 S.C.R ..
A Board has already been redone. Consequently, there is no detriment caused to the Stale. Since he had already retired from service, we think, on the facts and circumstances of the case, it is not a case for conducting a fresh enquiry as directed by the Tribunal. The order of the Tribunal is set aside. The Government is directed to consider his case for promotion B on par with the juniors who were promoted pending enquiry, and then grant him promotion if he is found eligible with all consequential reliefs. The Government will also redetermine his notional scale of pay on the promotional post and pay the arrears of salary and also pension as if he had retired on promotional post. This action should be taken and payment made within a period of six weeks from the date of the receipt of this order. C· The appeals arc accordingly allowed. No costs.
T.N.A. Appeals allowed.
Report an error in this judgment →
Contains information from the Indian High Court / Supreme Court Judgments dataset, licensed under CC-BY-4.0