Surjeet Singh vs SOUTH CENTRAL RAILWAY on 12 October 2026

ORAL ORDER

(As per Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Judicial Member)

The instant O.A. has been filed by the applicant, seeking the following relief: “(a) to call for the records and set aside the impugned proceeding letter No. GNT/SG/Stores/Accounts paras of OS/S&T/ST/NLPD dated 05.04.2024, the impugned proceeding letter No. GNT/SG/E/31 dated 05.04.2024 and the impugned show cause notice No. GNT/SG/Stock sheet/2018-19/SS dated 28.03.2022 of the 4th Respondent towards recovery of the shortage of material amounting to Rs. 18,64,462/-, without considering the plea of the applicant in his representation dated 30.05.2022, and for having proceeded with recovery of Rs. 18,066/- from April 2024 without conducting proper enquiry as per the Rules, declaring the same as arbitrary, illegal, unwarranted and in violation of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India; (b) to direct the Respondents to refund the amount already recovered before proceeding further duly giving reasonable opportunity to the applicant to prove his innocence and non-involvement; with all the consequential benefits and be pleased to pass such other order or orders as the Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.”

2. During the course of hearing, the learned counsel for the applicant drew our attention to the interim order passed by this Tribunal on 28.10.2025, which reads as under: “Learned counsel for the applicant has argued that, without following the proper procedure, respondents have put the applicant to hardship by way of recovery. It was only after the filing of this O.A. that a DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad , Phone=12d84631fad4985ed436f8e9bed43bf11c66dc25e028e9218a4d1d0fb79d7fe3, SERIALNUMBER=b9e3d3951b505950304a85c817eadedfffbcf53466121ac580715b2596ee45c4, E=padmavvathi23@gmail.com, CN= PADMAVATHI CHODAVARAPU

Location: Date: 2026 10 26 14:57:57-08'00' PADMAVATHI CHODAVARAPU

Charge Memo has been served under Rule 9 of RS (D&A) Rules, 1968, vide Memo dated 31.07.2024. Rejoinder has also been filed in this case. There is no mention of the charge memo in the reply filed by the respondents. Recovery from a delinquent has to be made, by way of punishment, after following the due procedure. In the present case, the recovery order, dt. 05.04.2024, precedes even the charge memo. It has been submitted on behalf of the applicant that the department has not proceeded in the DE after service of the charge memo, whereas the recovery is continued. Prima facie, there are grounds for interfering with the recovery orders, and it is felt necessary in the interest of justice to stay the order of recovery, dt. 05.04.2024, till further orders. Hence, further action on the recovery order is stayed.”

3. Learned counsel for the applicant fairly submits that the inquiry proceedings against the charge memo are already over and the Inquiry Officer has already submitted his report to the Disciplinary Authority for consideration of the case of the applicant and for taking suitable and appropriate action based on the inquiry report. She submits that despite such submission, no steps have been taken by the Disciplinary Authority for examining the Inquiry Report and passing appropriate orders on the same in accordance with law.

4. Opposing the grant of relief, learned counsel for the respondents submits that the interim order was passed at the relevant point of time because the inquiry was not concluded and that this does not stop the respondents from initiating recovery proceedings. He further submits that the recovery order is not inter-linked to the charge memo and is independent of the same and, therefore, the interim order cannot be made absolute.

5. In rejoinder to the argument put forth by the learned counsel for the respondents relying upon the averments in the counter affidavit, it has been DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad , Phone=12d84631fad4985ed436f8e9bed43bf11c66dc25e028e9218a4d1d0fb79d7fe3, SERIALNUMBER=b9e3d3951b505950304a85c817eadedfffbcf53466121ac580715b2596ee45c4, E=padmavvathi23@gmail.com, CN= PADMAVATHI CHODAVARAPU

Location: Date: 2026 10 26 14:57:57-08'00' PADMAVATHI CHODAVARAPU

submitted on behalf of the applicant that the charge memo relates to the purported misdemeanour which arises out of the recovery proceedings only, and that the cause of action of the charge memo and of the recovery so made is identical.

6. Be that as it may, since the matter is sub judice before the Disciplinary Authority, it is appropriate that the interim order passed by this Tribunal on 28.10.2025 be made absolute until the final order is passed by the Disciplinary Authority. The Disciplinary Authority, while passing appropriate orders vis-à-vis the inquiry report, shall also pass appropriate orders vis-à-vis the recovery proceedings. A reasoned order shall also be passed on recovery, if any, to be made from the applicant, after giving him an opportunity of hearing.

7. In view of the above, the O.A. is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. Pending MAs, if any, stand disposed of. No order as to costs.

(VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI) (MANISH GARG) ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER

/pv/

DN: C=IN, O=Central Administrative Tribunal, OU=Central Administrative Tribunal Hyderabad Bench, PostalCode=500004, L=Hyderabad, S=Telangana, STREET= No. 05-10-193, 1st Floor, HACA Bhavan, Saifabad, Hyderabad , Phone=12d84631fad4985ed436f8e9bed43bf11c66dc25e028e9218a4d1d0fb79d7fe3, SERIALNUMBER=b9e3d3951b505950304a85c817eadedfffbcf53466121ac580715b2596ee45c4, E=padmavvathi23@gmail.com, CN= PADMAVATHI CHODAVARAPU

Location: Date: 2026 10 26 14:57:57-08'00' PADMAVATHI CHODAVARAPU