Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana)
K. Raghu Ram Babu vs Director General Of Railway Protection ... on 22 June, 1998
Equivalent citations: 1998(5)ALD170, 1998(4)ALT736
Author: B.S. Raikote
Bench: B.S. Raikote
ORDER
1. In this writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the vires of sub-rule 8 of Rule 153 of RPF Rules, 1987. The said rule reads as under.
"The enrolled member charged shall not be allowed to bring in a legal practitioner at the proceedings but he may be allowed to take the assistance of any other member of the Force hereinafter referred to as "friend" where in the opinion of the Enquiry Officer, the enrolled member charged cannot put up his defence properly. Such "friend" must be a serving member of the Force of or below the rank of Sub-Inspector for the time being posted in the same division or the battalion where the proceedings are pending and not acting as a "friend" in any other proceedings pending anywhere. Such "friend" shall, however not be allowed to address the Enquiry Officer nor to cross-examine the witnesses."
2. This rule has been upheld by a Division Bench of the High Court of Rajasthan (Jodhpur Bench) vide its judgment and order dated 10-4-1995 in DB Civil WP No.5155 of 1990 and Batch. This judgment of the High Court of Rajasthan has been followed by a Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dated 16-10-1997 in WP N.3958 of 1996.
3. In these circumstances, there is very little for the learned Counsel for the petitioner to argue before me, a single Judge, regarding vires of sub rule (8) of Rule 153 of RPF Rules, 1987. However, the learned Counsel for the petitioner persuaded me to find fault with the clause "such a friend" shall, however not be allowed to address the Enquiry Officer nor to cross examine the witnesses" on the ground that the assistance of the "friend" contemplated in sub-rule (8) of Rule 153 of RPF Rules, 1987 would be farce and in substance, it is not assistance at all. A delinquent seeks the assistance of a "friend" as contemplated in sub-rule (8) of Rule 153 of RPF Rules, 1987 only when he is unable to defend his case either arguing the case by himself or be cross examining the witnesses examined on the side of the prosecution. If this right to address the Enquiry Officer or the right to cross examine the witnesses is denied to the "friend", it tantamounts to denying the same opportunity to the delinquent officer. Therefore, this provision has necessarily to be held as ultra vires of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India and also contrary to the principles of natural justice.
4. Though I have a feeling that there is substance in the argument of the learned Counsel for the petitioner in this behalf, but I am bound by the judgment of the Division Bench and I do not think that I can do anything in the matter so tar as the validity of sub-rule (8) of Rule 153 of RPF Rules, 1987 is concerned. In this view of the matter, I have no option but to dismiss the writ petition by following the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court dated 16-10-1997 passed in WP No.3958 of 1996 and accordingly, I pass the order as under.
5. The writ petition is dismissed but in the circumstances without costs.