IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 OP (CAT).No. 84 of 2010(S) -------------------------- OA.237/2009 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONERS: RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN OA NO. 237/09 ------------------------------------------------------- 1. BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED,REP. BY ITS CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM, KERALA CIRCLE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. GENERAL MANAGER TELECOM, BSNL, ALAPPUZHA. 3. DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER (P&A), O/O GMT, BSNL ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRI.P.J.PHILIP RESPONDENT(S): APPLICANT IN OA NO.237/09 ---------------------------------------- SATHYANESA KURUP.P.R, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O. RADHAKRISHNA KURUP, TELEPHONE MECHANIC (UNDER COMPULSORY RETIREMENT), PERUMBALAM TELEPHOE EXCHANGE, ALAPPUZHA, RESIDING AT PUNNOORETH HOUSE, EREZHA NORTH, CHETTIKULANGARA, MAVELIKKARA. ADV. SRI.P.NANDAKUMAR THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C .N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. -------------------------------------------- O.P. (CAT) No. 84 of 2010 -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard counsel for the petitioner. The order impugned is the one issued by Central Administrative Tribunal cancelling punishment of compulsory retirement imposed on the respondent, pursuant to his conviction in a criminal case filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. Even though counsel for the petitioner submitted that conviction and sentence entitle the BSNL to impose the punishment on the employee under the Conduct Rules even without holding an enquiry, what is seen from the Tribunal's order is that on appeal, the High Court accepted compounding of the offence and the respondent was acquitted. This Court in similar cases has taken the view that offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act does not involve any moral turpitude. In any case, in this case, respondent is acquitted and the punishment imposed based on trial court judgment no longer survives. Even though counsel for the petitioner submitted that OP (CAT) 84/2010 2 there is yet another case against the respondent, we do not think such a matter is considered either in the disciplinary proceedings or in the order of the Tribunal. Therefore we do not want to consider the fresh allegation against respondent entitling the department for disciplinary action. O.P. is accordingly dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR) Judge. (K. SURENDRA MOHAN) Judge. kk OP (CAT) 84/2010 3