TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re served on the respondent - learned Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioners-Union of India. contends that the respondent is deemed to have been in duty till the midnight of 31.03.2013 and therefore, the department was justified in serving Articles of Charge in between 10.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m. on 31.03.2013 and consequently, the same is deemed to be issued while the respondent was in se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... : Sri. Sabu Joseph ORDER The order dated 22.04.2015 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Bengaluru Bench, Bengaluru ( CAT for short) in O.S. No.395/2015 is called in question in this writ petition. 2. The respondent herein while working as an Additional Commissioner of Central Excise at Mysore, retired from service on 31.03.203 on attaining the age of superannuation. He w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deemed to have been in duty till the midnight of 31.03.2013 and therefore, the department was justified in serving Articles of Charge in between 10.00 p.m. and 11.00 p.m. on 31.03.2013 and consequently, the same is deemed to be issued while the respondent was in service. 4. The said submission of the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners-Union of India cannot be accepted. Sub-Rule (4) o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 013 issued from the Commissioner of Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Mysore-560 011 and the said Commissioner has certified that the respondent, who was working as Additional Commissioner, is relieved of his duties from the head Quarters, Mysore Commissionerate, Mysore, in the afternoon of 31.03.2013. It is not in dispute that the Articles of Charge were served on the respondent at 23.25 h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sanction of the President. In the matter on hand, admittedly, the sanction of the President or his delegate is not obtained by the Department while initiating the Departmental Action against the respondent, after his retirement from duties. 6. In view of the above, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order of the Tribunal in as much as the Tribunal is justified in concluding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
