P.B. Sawant and; Yogeshwar Dayal, JJ.
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard parties. There is no doubt that the employee was suspended from the year 1984 and the charge-sheet was served on him in the year 1988. The enquiry is not yet complete. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in ordering reinstatement of the employee. However, the Tribunal travelled beyond its jurisdiction in quashing the charges and the disciplinary proceedings themselves. We are informed that in pursuance of the order of the Tribunal the respondent-employee has been reinstated in service.
3. We, therefore, quash that part of the order of the Tribunal by which the Tribunal had quashed the charges and the disciplinary proceedings, and permit the appellant-Union of India, if it so intends, to proceed with the enquiry. However, the appellant is directed to complete the enquiry within 6 months from today. The appeal is allowed accordingly with no order as to costs. 1. Leave granted.
2. Heard parties. There is no doubt that the employee was suspended from the year 1984 and the charge-sheet was served on him in the year 1988. The enquiry is not yet complete. The Tribunal was, therefore, right in ordering reinstatement of the employee. However, the Tribunal travelled beyond its jurisdiction in quashing the charges and the disciplinary proceedings themselves. We are informed that in pursuance of the order of the Tribunal the respondent-employee has been reinstated in service.
3. We, therefore, quash that part of the order of the Tribunal by which the Tribunal had quashed the charges and the disciplinary proceedings, and permit the appellant-Union of India, if it so intends, to proceed with the enquiry. However, the appellant is directed to complete the enquiry within 6 months from today. The appeal is allowed accordingly with no order as to costs.