W.P. (C.) No.506/2010 Page 1 of 3 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + W.P. (C.) No.506/2010 % Date of Decision: 25.01.2010 Union of India and Others …. Petitioner Through Mr. Ansul and Ms. Pooja, Advocates. Versus Babu Lal Meena …. Respondent Through Mr. Manjeet Singh Reen, Advocate. CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MOOL CHAND GARG 1. Whether reporters of Local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? YES 2. To be referred to the reporter or not? NO 3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? NO ANIL KUMAR, J. * The petitioner/Union of India through the General Manager, Northern Railways & Ors has challenged the order dated 20th January, 2009 passed in O.A No. 1677/2008 titled Sh. Babu Lal Meena and others Vs. Union of India and others allowing the petition and quashing memorandum of charges issued against the petitioner. While deciding OA No. 1677/2008 of the respondent, Principal Bench, Central Administrative Tribunal had decided many other petitions including OA No. 1253/2008 titled Sh. Ram Kishan Vs. union of India and others by a common order. W.P. (C.) No.506/2010 Page 2 of 3 Against the order dated 20th January, 2009 deciding OA No. 1253/2008 titled Sh. Ram Kishan and others Vs. Union of India and others, a writ petition (C) No. 13894/2009 titled Union of India and others Vs. Sh. Ram Kishan and others was filed. The said petition was dismissed by order dated 23rd December, 2009 holding that there is no error in the order dated 20th January, 2009 passed by the Tribunal in the batch of petitioners and the Tribunal had rightly quashed the interim proceedings against the respondent. While dismissing the writ petitions, it was reiterated that some of the documents were not supplied to the employees or the copies which were supplied were illegible and the relevant record i.e. muster roll or the attendance register of the relevant department where the employees claim to have served during the period 15th November, 1985 to 18th March, 1986 had not been relied upon by the petitioners nor produced by the petitioners and in the absence the charges against the employee shall not be sustainable. It was also noted that the petitioners had failed to disclose as to how suddenly, after the impugned order of the Tribunal, the photocopies of the relied upon documents had been located, still the original record does not appear to be available. Thus, the order dated 20th January, 2009 by the Central Administrative, Principal Bench in various Original Applications including the present original application being OA No. 1677/2008 was also upheld. W.P. (C.) No.506/2010 Page 3 of 3 Therefore, for the same reasons as detailed by this Court in WPC No. 13894/2009 passed in the writ petition filed against the order dated 20th January, 2009 passed in OA No. 1253/2008 titled Sh. Ram Kishan Vs. Union of India and others, the present petition filed against the same order dated 20th January, 2009 passed in OA No. 1677/2008 titled Sh. Babulal Meena Vs. Union of India and others is also without any merit and it is, therefore, dismissed. ANIL KUMAR, J. JANUARY 25, 2010 MOOL CHAND GARG, J. ‘ss’