Central Administrative Tribunal - Patna
Mukesh Ranjan vs Railway on 28 September, 2021
-1-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PATNA BENCH, PATNA.
Reserved on: 24.08.2021
Date of order : 28.09.2021
CORAM
HON'BEL MR. M.C. VERMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE MR. SUNIL KUMAR SINHA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
1. OA/050/00240/2020
Mukesh Ranjan, Son of Late Dineshwar Prasad Yadav, Loco Pilot
(G/Electric), Under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway,
Jhajha ((Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway
ilway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer
Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post- Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
-2-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
2. OA/050/00241/2020
Chandan Kumar, Son of Ram Jee Mahto, Senior Assistant Loco Pilot
(Electric) under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway,
Jhajha (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager, East Central ntral
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal
pal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post- Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
3. OA/050/00242/2020
Dibyanshu Sinha, Son of Ram Niwas Mehta, Loco Pilot (G/Electric),
Under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway, Jhajha
(Bihar).
......... Applicant.
-3-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through gh the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post- Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
4. OA/050/00243/2020
Alok Ranjan Kumar, Son of Sri Mahendra Rajak, Senior Assistant Loco
Pilot (Electric), under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central
Railway, Patna (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
-4-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway ay Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer,
Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post-Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financiall Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
5. OA/050/00244/2020
Ajay Kumar, Son of Prakash Prasad, Loco Pilot (G/Electric), Tillasiya
under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway
Railway, Rajgir (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel],
[Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
ihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
-5-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post-Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaud
Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
6. OA/050/00245/2020
Deepak Kumar, son of Sri Krishna Prasad, Senior Assistant Loco Pilot
(Electric), under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway,
Rajendra Nagar, District
District- Patna (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP,
Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation),
(Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post- Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
-6-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
7. OA/050/00253/2020
Bimal Kumar, son of Girish Prasad, Senior Assistant Loco Pilot
(Electric), under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway,
Danapur (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. Thee Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senioror Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post- Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
8. OA/050/00258/2020
Suman Kumar, Son of Sri Pramod Pandit, Senior Assistant Loco Pilot
(Electric)
(Electric),, under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway, Kiul
(Bihar).
......... Applicant.
-7-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post- Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central
Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
9. OA/050/00259/2020
Shiv Jee Kumar, Son of Late Sagar Paswan, Senior Assistant Loco Pilot
(Electric), under Chief Crew Controller/TRS, East Central Railway,
Patna (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-
PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
-8-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP,
Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation),
(Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post-Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
10. OA/050/00263/2020
Nalin Kumar, Son of Sri Surendra Kumar, Senior Assistant Loco pilot
(Electric), Under Chief Crew Controller/TRS
Controller/TRS,, East Central Railway,
Danapur, District
District- Patna (Bihar).
......... Applicant.
By advocate : Shri M.P.Dixit
Vs.
1. The Union of India through the General Manager,
anager, East Central
Railway, Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS-PS Hajipur (Town), District--
Vaishali at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
2. The General Manager [Personnel], East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur, Pin Code-
Code 841001 (Bihar).
3. The Principal Chief Electrical Engineer, East Central Railway,
Hajipur, PO- Digghi Kala, PS- Hajipur (Town),
( District- Vaishali
at Hajipur, Pin Code- 841001 (Bihar).
4. The Divisional Railway Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District
rict- Patna - 801105 (Bihar).
5. The Additional Divisional Railway Manager/OP, East Central
Railway, Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District-
District Patna- 801105
(Bihar).
-9-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020,
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020,
OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020,
OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020
6. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post Khagaul, District-- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
7. The Senior Divisional Electrical Engineer (Operation), East
Central Railway, Danapur, Post-
Post Khagaul, District- Patna--
801105 (Bihar).
8. The Senior Divisional Financial Manager, East Central Railway,
Danapur, Post- Khagaul, District
ict- Patna- 801105 (Bihar).
......... Respondents.
By Advocate : Shri B.K. Chaudhary
Shri S.K. Raj
ORDER
Per S.K. Sinha, A.M. : All the above OAs were clubbed and heard together for raising same grievance, having similar background and praying for same reliefs reliefs. Also, same ame set of counsel represented the applicants and respondents in all these cases.
2. The OAs have been preferred assailing the order of Dismissal ismissal from Railway SService under Rule 14(ii) of the Railway Servants (Discipli (Discipline ne & Appeal) Rules, 1968 passed on 29.05.2020 by the Disciplinary Authority (Annexure- A/3).
A/3). The applicants have prayed to quash and set aside the impugned order order(s) and direct ct the respondents to re reinstate them with consequential benefits.
3. Applicants pplicants were appointed as Assistant Loco Pilots Pilot (ALP) in June-September, September, 2015 against the posts notified by RRB Muzaffarpur on 18.01.2014 under CEN 01/2014 and after going through the selection process which included written test, aptitude test and document verification. A After appointment, the applicants were promoted to the post of Senior Assistant Loco Pilot in December -10- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 2017 and further to the post of Loco Pilot (G) in 2019. On n 30.04.2020, the Disciplinary Authority issued show cause notice to the applicant applicant(s) stating that his handwriting on answer sheet//document at different stages of recruitment process were sentt for examination to Government overnment Examiner of Questioned Documents(GEQD) at Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL), Kolkata and their report reveals a mismatch which establishes beyond doubt that some impersonator had appeared in the written examination for the applicant applicant.. The applicants were directed to submit explanation against removal from service within 15 days. The he Disciplinary Authority held that the explanation submitted by the applicant(s) was not satisfactory and it was not reasonably practicable to hold regular inquiry as the applicant may indulge in malpractices/impersonation to disturb the working environment and dismissed them from Railway Service with immediate effect under Rule 14(ii) of the RS(D&A)Rules, 1968 vide order dated 29.05.2020.
4. The applicants, in their pleadings and submissions of the counsel counsel, have denied the allegation of impersonation and have accused cused the D Disciplinary Authority of violating the principle of natural justice.
tice. The applicants have averred that the Disciplinary Authority did not provide them copy of the FSL report(s) report or any preliminary enquiry report on the basis of which the show cause notice was issued and the impugned order was passed. Applicants have argued rgued -11- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 that opinion pinion of forensic expert was required to be cross - examined in order to be used as valid evidence. The applicants in their replies,, raised the issues of lapse of six years since the conclusion of recruitment tment process; the recruitment tests being held under strict supervision supervision; proper verification of identity documents and admit card being held before the tests; applicants getting promotion in the last six years years; and a need to conduct full-fledged full fledged departmental enquiry under Rule 9 of the RS(D&A) Rules for imposing any Major penalty. The applicant(s) has(ve) averred that without any discussion the Disciplinary Authority rejected the explanation as not satisfactory and imposed the most severe punishment without holding regular departmental proceeding and giving any opportunity to test the veracity and validity of FSL report.
4.1 The applicants have further stated that the Disciplinary isciplinary Authority provided no material fact in support of his apprehension that the applicant(s) may create disturbance through malpractices/ malpractices/impersonation and it was reasonably not practicable to hold regular departmental proceeding. The applicants have referred to Railway Board instruction instructionss that the reasons recorded by Disciplinary Authority for dispensing with regular inquiry should be supported by objective facts and/or independent material. 4.2 The applicants have further averred that regular departmental proceeding had been initia initiated ted under Rule 9 of the -12- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 RS(D&A) Rules against similarly placed officials facing same charges under Mughalsarai and Sonpur Railway Divisions which amounts to discrimination against the applicants and violation of Article 14 of the Constitution Constitution. The applicants,, in support of this averment, have ve annexed memoranda of Charge sheet under Rule 9 of the RS(D&A) Rules served upon some officials of Mughalsarai Division (Annexure A/6 series) and reference of a case of Sonpur Division in the Appeal before the Appellate Authority Authority(Annexure P/4).
4.3. On the point of exhausting available legal remedies, the applicants pleaded ((Para 6 of OA) that OA was filed as immediate interim relief was required required. The he impugned order was passed under Rule 14 (ii) of the RS (D&A) without mentioning mention any fact as to why it was reasonably not practicable to hold regular enquiry enquiry, hence the order was ex facie illegal illegal. Filing an Appeal before the competent authority would have only delayed the redressal of their suffering and grievances whereas they needed immediate interim relief. The applicant(s) put reliance on the order of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in H H. S. Rangaramu Vs The Management of Karnataka State Road Transport Corporation (WP No. 4524 of 20 2002
5. The respondents raised preliminary objection to the OA on the ground of maintainability as the applicants had not exhausted the available remedy of Appeal and R Revision evision under Rule 22 and Rule 25 of RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 1968.. They averred that the OA was not tenable -13- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 under Section 20 of the AT Act. The respondents referred tto o Hon'ble Supreme Court order in Govt. of A.P P.& Others Vs Sridevi & Others reported eported in (2202) 5 SCC 37, order of Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of HCL Infosys Ltd Vs State of Rajasthan and the order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of R K Singh Vs Union of India.. The respondents averred that Rule 22 of RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 provides wide scope to the appellate authority. In cases where an enquiry nquiry in the manner ner laid down in Rule 9 of the RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 has not already been held held,, the appellate authority may himself hold such inquiry or direct such inquiry to be held in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9 (supra) and thereafter, on a consideration of the proceedings of such inquiry, pass such orders as it may deem fit. Further Rule 25(3) provides that an n application for revision shall be dealt with in the same manner as if it were an Appeal under these rules. The respondents pleaded that without exhausting sting available remedies remedies, OA was untenable.
5.1 Respondents further averred that the applicant was as dismissed as his suitability for initial appointment had come under question. After receiving the FSL Report a preliminary enquiry was held by AEE/Operation on 17.03.2020 who observed that document verification is enough to establish the fact that the applicant had not appeared in the written examination and that he was rather sele selected cted by using an impersonator during the written examination. The -14- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 applicants were issued show cause notice(s) and as the replies of applicants were not found satisfactory they were dismissed under Rule 14 of the RS(D&A) Rules.
5.2 Respondents put reliance nce on the judgements of Hon'ble Apex Court in Satyavir Singh and Others vs Union of India and Others (1986 AIR 555) and Union of India and Another vs Tulsiram Patel and Others (1985 AIR 1416) 1416).. Learned Counsel for respondents averred that the majority jjudgement udgement in Tulsiram Patel case conferred upon the civil servants who have been dismissed or removed from service or reduced in rank by applying second proviso to Article 311(2) or an analogous service rule the right to a full and complete inquiry in an ap appeal or revision. In the wake of Apex Court judgement in Tulsiram Patel case (supra) and Satyavir Singh Case (supra) ,t ,the he Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT),, Government of India issued an OM dated 11th November 1985 clarifying the issues arising from the judgements in the two cases. Railway Board circulated this DoPT OM vide their letter dated 06.02.1986.
06.02.1986 The Rule 14(ii) of the RS(D&A) Rules is analogous to Arti Article le 311(2) of the Constitution of India providing special procedure for imposition of penalties in situations where it is not practically possible to hold an inquiry. Learned counsel averred that the applicants could claim in Appeal ppeal that an inquiry should be held with respect to the charges on which the penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed upon them. -15-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 The RS(D&A) Rules Rules,1968 Rule 22 (c) (iv) (b) authorizes the Appellate Appellate and Revising authority to hold an inquiry or direct that such inquiry to be held in accordance with the provisions of Rule 9 (supra). The applicants' grievance of being denied natural justice is not tenable as they have not availed the option of Appeal and R Revision evision in which they can ask for a full and complete inquiry. 5.3 The respondents further cited the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3105/2017 in the matter of Hari Niwas Gupta Vs. State of Bihar and Anr. and Civil Appeal No. 3106-- 3107 of 2017 in Komal Ram and Jitendra Nath Singh ngh Vs State of Bihar & A Another.
5.4 Respondents also submitted that there were apparent mistakes, errors and possible manipulations in document verification during the recruitment tests which led to such large scale impersonation impersonation. Investigation nvestigation /Disciplinary action were underway against the then Chairperson of RRB Muzaffarpur and other official(s) involved in it.
6. Heard the submissions and considered the materials on record.
7. The OA(s) was admitted under the provisions of Section 21(3) of the AT Act after due consideration ration. During pendency of these OA(s),, the respondents filed MA on 29.09.2020 praying to dismiss the OA(s) as the applicant(s) had filed Appeal before the Appellate Authority on 09.07.2020 and the Appellate Authority was feeling -16- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 difficulty in considering the said appeal in view of the pendency of the OA(s) OA(s). The matter was heard on 13.01.2021 and it was observed that allowing the MA would amount to d deciding the OA(s).. To avoid the said situation it was suggested to have the hearing of OA itself and the counsel for respondents agreed not to press the MA. The counsel for applicant(s) made a categorical statement that he does not want to press the Departmental Appeal Appeals and expressed willingness to withdraw the Appeal Appeals at the risk and cost of the applicants app and said departmental appeal(s) have since been withdrawn.
8. We now advert to the issues arising from OA(s). It is trite to say that the FSL report disclosing mismatch in the handwritings of applicants on the answer sheets and other documents obt obtained ained at different levels of recruitment process is highly incriminating and the respondents could not have overlooked the FSL report. The report implies use se of impersonator by applicants in the recruitment test and raises the question of applicants' competence com and suitability for the posts to which they were appointed. It invalidates the recruitment process for the applicants and if the report is true the applicants lose right to continue in the service. However, examination of answer sheets and documents by handwriting expert after a gap of six years begs question of authenticity of the documents examined and the validity and reliability of the expert opinion. It needs to be established that the documen documents, ts, answer sheets etc. etc sent to the GEQD were actually those written and signed by the applicants during the -17- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 test and aalso, lso, whether the finding of handwriting expert is valid and reliable reliable.
9. We are inclined to hold that there is a need to test the authenti authenticity city of the documents sent to FSL and validity of the expert opinion thereon.. The issue before us is whether that inquiry should be held by the Appellate Authority as enabled by the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in Tulsiram Patel case (supra) or it sshould hould be held ab initio from the stage of show cause notice to the applicant(s).
10. The show cause notice issued to the applicant on 30.04.2020 reads as follows:
follows:-
" During investigation regarding your candidature in the written examination held on 15.06.2014 for the post of ALP selection, writings at the different level of the recruitment of yours were found mismatched. Hence, declaration form I, II & III duly written by you in RRB/MFP on the date of verification of qualification, OMR Sheet for written written examination and affidavit Sheet for aptitude test were sent to Examiner of Question Documents, Director of Forensic Science, Kolkata. From the report of GEQD against you it is established beyond doubt that some impersonator had appeared in the written examination.
You are hereby directed to submit your explanation within 15 days from receipt of show cause notice as to why you should not removed from Railway Service."
11. The order of dismissal from service under rule 14(ii) supra issued to the appli applicant(s) reads as follows:-
follows:
" You were selected in the written examination conducted by RRB/MFP on 15.06.2014 for the post of Asstt. Loco Pilot. In the written examination writing of candidates OMR answer sheet do not match with writing of candidate's attendance attendance slip for aptitude test held on 20.09.2014 and all three declaration form I,II, III duly written by candidate on the date of verification.-18-
OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 Same has also been confirmed by forensic examination report of Central Forensic Laboratory,DFSS, MHA, Govt. of India, Kolkata and letter of Dy. CVO/A, East Central Railway, Hajipur vide ref. no. ECR/Vig/V-2/C/NG/RRB/MFP/02 2/C/NG/RRB/MFP/02-18/PC/DK/28 18/PC/DK/28 dated 24.01.2020.
A Show Cause Notice No. CS/Major/MR dated 30.04.2020 has been issued to you with a direction to submit your explanation.
ation. You have submitted your explanation dated 15.05.2020. Your explanation is not satisfactory.
In view of the above it is established that impersonator had appeared in the written examination and considered that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an enquiry in the manner provided in Railway Service D&A Rule 1968 as he may indulge in malpractices/Impersonator to disturb working environment.
Now therefore, in exercise of power conferred by Rule no. 14(ii) of the RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 the undersigned is is hereby Dismissed you from the Railway Service with immediate effect.
You will please handover to CCC/TRS/Jhajha Railway property, if any, in your possession.
You will appreciate that the railway quarters occupied by you is essentially required by other railway staff. You are, therefore, required to deliver to the railway administration the possession of railway quarter by vacating the same as early as possible as but not later than 29.06.2020. It may be mentioned here that if the said quarter is not vacated vacated by the stipulated date, you make yourself liable to railway for eviction there from and for damage for the unauthorised use an occupation thereof.
If you wish to make an appeal against the penalty, you can do so within a period of 45 days to the ADRM/OP/DNR ADRM/OP/DNR (the APPELLATE AUTHORITY) through proper channel."
12. It is evident from the show cause notice and the impugned order above that the Disciplinary Authority had accepted the validity of the FSL report and based on that passed the order of Dismiss Dismissal from service. It is not in dispute that the Disciplinary Authority did not provide copy of the FSL report or the preliminary enquiry report to the applicants.
13. The ground mentioned by the Disciplinary Authority to dispense with the regular departmental enquiry is that "the applicant -19- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 may indulge in malpractice/impersonator to disturb working environment." The DoP&TT guideline dated 11.11.1985 issued in the wake o of the judgements udgements of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Tulsiram Patel (supra) and Satyvir Singh (supra) states the following at Para 6.
"6. Coming to clause (b) of the second proviso to Art. 311(2), there are two conditions precedent which must be satisfied before action under this clause is taken against a government servant. These conditions are:-
are:
(i) There must exist a situation which makes the holding of an inquiry contemplated by Art. 311(2) not reasonably practicable.
What is required is that holdinging of inquiry is not practicable in the opinion of a reasonable man taking a reasonable view of the prevailing situation. It is not possible to enumerate all the cases in which it would not be reasonably practicable to hold the inquiry. Illustrative cases would be:-
(a) Where a civil servant, through or together with his associates, terrorises, threatens or intimidates witnesses who are likely to give evidence against him with fear of reprisal in order to prevent them from doing so; or
(b) where the civil servant by himself or with or through others threatens, intimidates and terrorises the officer who is the disciplinary authority or members of his family so that the officer is afraid to hold the inquiry or direct it to be held; or
(c) Where an n atmosphere of violence or of general indiscipline and insubordination prevails at the time the attempt to hold the inquiry is made.
The disciplinary authority is not expected to dispense with a disciplinary inquiry lightly or arbitrarily or out of ulterior rior motives or merely in order to avoid the holding of an inquiry or because the Department's case against the civil servant is weak and is, therefore, bound to fail."
In view of the DoP&T guidelines dated 11.11.1985 referred above,, the ground mentioned by the Disciplinary Authority is not specifically dealing with any of the ground illustrated in the said -20- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 DoP&T guidelines. It could be argued on behalf of the respondents that it is covered by the ground (c ) above which reads as under:-
(a) "Where an atmosphere of violence or of general indiscipline and insubordination prevails at the time the attempt to hold the inquiry is made."
made.
But when we examine the overall situation of the matter we find that the grounds mentioned by the Disciplinary Authorit Authorityy is not squarely covered by th this illustration as well. There must exist a situation which makes the holding of an enquiry contemplated not reasonably practicable. It is not a case of that nature and this finding/observation is fortified by the facts that on similar allegation and under similar circumstances the employees in other Divisions have been served charge memo and disciplinary proceeding against them is going on. There is no mention by the respondents in written statement or submission submissions during the argument that any one of those those employees indulged in any malpractice. The Railway Board vide RBE 133/2017 on this subject has emphasized that the reasons recorded by Disciplinary Authority for dispensing with the inquiry should be supported by objective fa facts. The order of the Disciplinary Authority dispensing with the enquiry thus appears not to be supported by germane reasons. Further, the idea that an impersonator may appear on behalf of a charged officer in a departmental enquiry is unreasonable unreasonable. How can an an impersonator appear as charged officer in a departmental proceeding without connivance of the enquiry -21- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 officer, presenting officer and prosecuting witnesses? By any stretch of imagination the decision to dispense with the proceeding cannot be said to be rational.
14. The learned counsel for the respondents has vehemently argued that even if enquiry was needed the same can be held by the Appellate Authority and it will not be necessary to quash the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority on the grounds grounds that enquiry was needed and that it was dispensed with.
with It would be proper to give liberty to the applicants to prefer an Appeal ppeal and request the Appellate Authority therein to conduct the enquiry before passing any final order. Learned counsel for respondents respo placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India and Another vs Tulsiram Patel and Others (1985 AIR 1416) and RBE No. 133/2017 that the applicants can ask for full and complete enquiry into the charges charges. The he Appellate Authority can hold enquiry under Rule 22 of the RS(D&A) Rules, 1968 but whether in the facts and circumstances of the case it would be appropriate to adopt such approach.
15. Before entering into this aspect we again revert to the order of thee Disciplinary Authority dispensing with the regular enquiry. If the e submission of the learned counsel for the respondents is analysed in letter and spirit, it will reveal that according to the respondents also the enquiry is required and that could be done done by the Appellate -22- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 Authority Authority. However, the reason given by Disciplinary Authority for dispensing with the regular enquiry under Rule 9 (supra) could also apply to the departmental rtmental enquiry by Appellate Authority.
Authority
16. We agree that an enquiry at the level of Appellate Authority as prescribed under the judgement of Hon'ble Apex Court in Tulsiram Patel case would redress the applicants' grievance of being denied natural justice and provide them opportunity to present their case.
case.
But, this his would not address the issue of discrimination which the applicants are facing facing. Further, it would not be in the interest interest of justice to let go the arbitrary use of the provisions of Rule 14(ii) of the RS(D&A) Rules by the Disciplinary authority authority. It appears rs that the impugned order(s) were passed with caprice and without rationale and thus are liable to be set aside.
17. In light of the aforesaid discussion, the impugned order(s) order of dismissal of applicant applicant(s) dated 29.05.2020 (Annexure A-3) in all the ten OAs, As, passed under Rule 14(ii) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 are hereby quashed and set aside. However, this order shall not impede the Respondents from holding regular departmental enquiry against the applicants by giving proper charge-- sheet under the RS(D&A) Rules, 1968.
8. While it shall be open for the applicants to claim consequential benefits, benefits the Respondents may restrict th the benefits to what has been given to similarly placed officials facing departmental proceeding for the same me charge in other -23- OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, A/050/242/2020, OA/050/00240/2020,OA/050/00241/2020, OA/050/ 243/2020, OA/050 244/2020, OA/050/ 245/2020, OA 253/2020, OA/050/00258/2020, OA/050/00259/2020 & OA/050/00263/2020 Divisions ivisions of E.C. Railway Railway,, if they decide to hold the departmental enquiries against these applicants applicants.
18. With these directions, all the ten OA(s) are allowed. MAs, if any also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.
19. Original order will be kept in the file of OA No 240/2020 and its photocopies will be placed in the remaining nine files.
[ Sunil Kumar Sinha] [M.C. Verma] Administrative Member Judicial Member Srk.