Disciplinary proceedings abate upon the death of a charged employee during the pendency of a departmental appeal.

Late Ramesh Chand Kangali, a Group ‘D’ Railway employee since 1981, was removed from service on 29.05.1997 following a departmental inquiry for unauthorized absence from 06.07.1995 to 13.03.1996

The inquiry report noted that only 13 days were unauthorized, while the remaining period was supported by private medical treatment

The employee filed a departmental appeal on 11.07.1997, which remained pending for 13 years until his death on 06.08.2010

Following a direction from the Tribunal in a previous O.A. (No. 887/2013), the Appellate Authority substituted the deceased's daughter (the applicant) but dismissed the appeal on 16.06.2017, upholding the removal

The applicant challenged both the removal and appellate orders, seeking retiral benefits.

1. Whether the disciplinary proceedings and the penalty of removal stand abated if the employee dies during the pendency of a departmental appeal

2. Whether the prolonged inaction of the respondents in deciding the statutory appeal for 20 years (including during the employee's lifetime) vitiates the proceedings

Railway Board Circular (R.B.E. No. 115/2000) dated 19.06.2000, which mandates that disciplinary proceedings must be closed immediately upon the death of the charged railway servant

Smt. Manju Lata Srivastava v. Union of India & Ors (O.A. No. 1121/2005), which established the principle that if a charged official dies while an appeal against punishment is pending, the entire disciplinary proceeding abates, and the employee is deemed to have died in service

The Tribunal reasoned that departmental proceedings and appeals constitute a single continuous process

Since the deceased employee had preferred a timely appeal in 1997 that was never decided during his lifetime, the proceedings had not attained finality

The Tribunal rejected the respondents' argument that the employee’s failure to appear for a personal hearing excused the delay, holding that the Appellate Authority had a statutory duty to decide the appeal on merits based on available records

Applying R.B.E. No. 115/2000, the Tribunal held that the death of the employee during this pendency triggered an automatic abatement of the proceedings

Consequently, the punishment of removal was rendered legally non-existent, and the employee must be treated as having died while "in service"

It held that the disciplinary proceedings abated upon the employee's death in 2010

The respondents were directed to treat the employee as having died in service and to release all death-cum-retiral benefits, service benefits, and arrears to the applicant within four months

Regarding compassionate appointment, the applicant was granted liberty to file a separate application