Central Administrative Tribunal - Allahabad
Rahul Dev Gupta vs General Manager N C Rly on 16 October, 2025
Reserved on 08.09.2025
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
ALLAHABAD BENCH, ALLAHABAD
This the 16th day of October, 2025
Original Application No. 615 of 2016
Present:
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Joshi, Member-(Judicial)
Hon'ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member- (Administrative)
Rahul Dev Gupta, S/o Sri Prakash, R/o 1753/A, Chanakyapuram, Sipri
Bazar, Jhansi.
.....Applicant
By Adv: Shri Sanjay Kumar Om
VERSUS
1. Union of India through General Manager, North Central Railway
Allahabad.
2. Chief Mechanical Engineer North Central Railway, Allahabad.
3. Addl. Divisional Railway Manager North Central Railway, Allahabad
Division, Allahabad.
4. Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer North Central Railway, Allahabad
Division, Allahabad.
. . . Respondents
By Adv: Shri Pramod Kumar Rai
ORDER
Delivered by: Hon'ble Mr. Anjani Nandan Sharan, Member (A) Heard Shri Pradeep Kumar Mishra holding brief of Shri Sanjay Kumar Om, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Pramod Kumar Rai, learned counsel for the respondents.
2. The instant Original Application, under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985, has been filed by the applicant seeking following reliefs:
A. To issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dt. 7.8.2014, 9.3.2015 & 22.2.2016 (Annexure No. 1, 2 & 3) passed by Resp. no. 4, 3 & 2 respectively.
SAHIL SHARMA B. To issue a further writ order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the respondents to reinstate the applicant on the post of Asstt. Loco Pilot and grant him salary and other consequential benefits, as if the impugned order of removal has not been passed.
C. To pass any other suitable order or direction which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
D. To award the cost of the present O.A. in favour of the applicant. "
3. The brief facts, as per the applicant, are that he appeared in the examination for the post of Assistant Loco Pilot (hereinafter referred to as ALP) in North Central Railway, Allahabad Division. Followed by interview, he was directed to appear in the medical examination thereof. However, during the process of selection, another notification for the same post i.e. ALP was issued by the Railway Recruitment Board, Bhopal for the vacancies of Western Railway, Ratlam Division. The applicant also applied for the same and qualified the examination and was called for the medical test from Ratlam Division before any call from Allahabad Division, he went to Ratlam Division in October, 2007. Soon thereafter, the applicant received a message that medical test in Allahabad Division is also going to take place shortly, as such, the applicant abandoned the medical examination at Ratlam Division as he was interested in the vacancies of North Central Railway, Allahabad Division. The applicant did not undergo any medical test conducted by the Ratlam Division. The applicant appeared in the medical test conducted by the North Central Railway Hospital Allahabad and was declared fit in A-1 category.
3.1 Thereafter, the applicant was sent for one year training at Chandausi, which he successfully completed and vide order dated 17.02.2009, he was posted as ALP (Diesel) at Kanpur as a confirmed employee. He was performing his duties very well in almost all shifts. After 25.04.2011, the respondents, without assigning any reason, directed him to proceed on sick leave and since then they were not assigning any duties to him. Later on, on 21.05.2011 the applicant was directed to report at Northern Railway Central Hospital, New Delhi. As per their instructions, the applicant reported on 22.05.2011 but was directed to report on 24.06.2011 to appear before a medical board at Delhi. The applicant appeared before the medical board from 24.06.2011 to 01.07.2011 but he was directed to report back at Kanpur, SAHIL SHARMA where also, he was marked as sick but his attendance was maintained upto 23.02.2012.
3.2 Thereafter, the respondents, without assigning any reason, orally directed the applicant not to attend office and as such he made an application on 20.03.2012 to permit him to attend his duties and regularize his services. Since, the respondents did not pay any heed to the repeated requests of the applicant, the applicant filed Original Application No. 3109 of 2012 (Rahul Dev Gupta Vs Union of India & Others) before Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench. The same was disposed of on 19.09.2012, directing the respondents to decide his representation and pass a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months.
3.3 Thereafter, the respondent-4 issued a show cause notice on 21.07.2014 alleging therein that prior to his medical examination at North Central Railway Allahabad Division, he was subjected to medical examination before Chief Medical Superintendent, Ratlam Division, wherein it was detected that the applicant was having enlarged heart and was not fit in requisite A-1 medical category and he concealed this fact while applying for appointment as ALP and as such he was not fit for retention in railway services. The applicant submitted his reply on 30.07.2014. The applicant was removed from services vide order dated 07.08.2014 on the ground that holding of enquiry is not practicable.
3.4 It is incorrect to allege that the applicant was declared unfit in Western Railway, Ratlam Division as during the course of the medical examination there, the applicant decided to abandon the medical checkup, considering the fact that he had been selected for the same post of ALP in North Central Railway, Allahabad Division. Thereafter, the applicant reported for medical checkup at North Central Railway Allahabad Division and completed the same and was declared medically fit for the post of ALP and was sent for requisite training thereof followed by his regular posting at Kanpur on 17.02.2009, where he was satisfactorily working for 2-3 years. It is not correct to allege that he has concealed any relevant fact from the respondents. However, the probability cannot be denied that alleged disease has developed during the course of the applicant's service.
SAHIL SHARMA 3.5 There does not exist any circumstances which warrant applicant's removal from service under Rule 14(ii) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules (hereinafter referred to as DAR Rules) and action of the respondents is absolutely illegal and violative of Article 311 of the Constitution of India. The respondents did not record any reasons for exercising its power to invoke the provisions of the Rule 14(ii) of DAR Rules and in any case, the same has not been communicated to the applicant, which itself is violative of principles of natural justice. In the absence of an enquiry before passing the order dated 07.08.2014, the applicant could not prove his innocence as to whether he concealed any material facts from the respondents. The applicant preferred his appeal on 16.09.2014 against order dated 07.08.2014, but the respondent-3, without considering the grounds raised by the applicant, dismissed the same vide order dated 09.03.2015 upholding the order passed by the Disciplinary Authority dated 07.08.2014. The observations made by the respondents-3 in order dated 09.03.2015 are wholly erroneous as much as there is no charge sheet issued to the applicant nor any allegations were leveled and absolutely no enquiry was held. The applicant preferred revision petition before the respondent-2, which was rejected without any application of mind on 22.02.2016 on the ground that the applicant has not raised any new ground.
3.6 The respondents failed to examine that before entering into the service as ALP, the applicant had undergone a complete medical examination in the year 2007, wherein he was declared fit in requisite A-1 category and after a lapse of 4 years, he cannot be declared unfit. The applicant has not been furnished any report by the medical board that the applicant is unfit in A-1 category. If the applicant had been told about his medical unfitness in 2007 itself, he would have preferred some other employment but at this stage, he has become over-age for almost all the public employment, therefore, equity demands that even if the applicant is unfit in any particular category, he may be provided any suitable alternative employment according to his medical category.
4. In the counter affidavit, the respondents have submitted that the applicant was selected for the post of ALP (Diesel) in the grade of Rs. 5200- 20200 in the Grade Pay Rs. 1900/- by the Railway Recruitment Board after SAHIL SHARMA being declared medically fit in A-1 medical category. He was sent for requisite training from 08.01.2008 to 17.02.2009. After successful completion of his training, he was posted as ALP (Diesel) in Kanpur w.e.f. 08.01.2009.
4.1 A complaint of irregular appointment was received from the Chief Vigilance Commissioner and in reference to the Chief Medical Director, Northern Railway, New Delhi's letter dated 21.07.2011, the applicant was directed to report at Northern Railway Central Hospital, New Delhi from 24.06.2011 to 03.07.2011 for special examination. As per the findings given by the medical board in respect of the applicant vide its letter dated 17.10.2011, the applicant was found to be unfit for the post of ALP in A-1 medical category as the applicant was suffering from Congential Heart Anomaly i.e. Ebstein Anomaly. The applicant was then discharged from Railway sick on 22.02.2012 for noncompliance of orders. The applicant after being discharged from Railway sick, failed to report to Senior Section Engineer, Loco, Kanpur and absconded from service w.e.f. 22.02.2012. Thereafter, the applicant filed an Original Application No. 3109/2012 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, which came to be disposed of on 19.09.2012, with a direction to the respondents-5 to decide the applicant's representation. The Review Application No. 320 of 2012 (in OA 3109/2012) was also disposed of on 20.11.2012 with a direction to respondent-5 to consider the representations of the applicant. Since, no decision regarding joining of the applicant had been taken, the Tribunal directed the respondents, in Misc Application No. 2446/2013 (in OA 3109/2012) on 30.04.2014, to take final decision on the representations referred to in the order passed by the Tribunal in OA No. 3109/2012. In the meantime, the applicant reported to the Senior Section Engineer, Kanpur on 21.03.2014 and was sent for special medical examination on 01.04.2014. Vide Chief Medical Superintendent, Kanpur memo dated 07.04.2014, the applicant was found unfit in A-1 medical category as the applicant was suffering from RBBB and defective vision.
4.2 The applicant adopted fraudulent means for securing his appointment as the applicant concealed the material fact that prior to his appointment in Allahabad Division he was declared unfit by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Ratlam Divison. Therefore, the applicant was issued a show SAHIL SHARMA cause notice vide letter dated 21.07.2014 in this regard, wherein it was stated that it is proposed to terminate the services of the applicant by invoking Rule 14(ii) of the Railway Servants (D&R) Rules 1968 because holding enquiry was not practicable in the case of the applicant and advised to submit a representation within a period of 10 days.
4.3 It is further stated by the respondents that the applicant, before joining in North Central Railway, Allahabad Division, was selected in Railway Services as ALP in Western Railway, Ratlam Division and was sent for medical examination to the Chief Medical Superintendent, Ratlam Division. As per the medical report given by the CMS, Ratlam, the applicant's heart was found enlarged and the applicant had also sent an imposter for ECG but due to alertness of the ECG technician, he was caught and the applicant did not report back to the CMS, Ratlam. The same was reported by the CMS, Ratlam Division to the Divisional Railway Manager vide letter dated 15.10.2007. It is evident that the applicant was aware of his adverse medical report and concealed this material fact from the Railway Administration while applying for the post of ALP in North Central Railway, Allahabad Division. The applicant, while proceeding for medical examination to Railway Hospital, Allahabad, in medical memo dated 19.12.2007, failed to declare that he was examined and declared unfit for Railway Service by Medical Board in the last three years, which again substantiates that the applicant had concealed the material fact that he was medically unfit for the post of ALP.
4.4 Further, based on the inputs available on record regarding his medical unfitness for the post of ALP, the applicant was subjected to medical examination at Northern Railway Central Hospital, New Delhi by a medical board from 24.06.2011 to 03.07.2011. Vide medical board's report dated 14.07.2011, the applicant was found having Congenital Heart Anomaly i.e. Ebstein Anomaly and was unfit for the post of ALP in A-1 medical category. The applicant was again subjected to medical examination by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Kanpur and was again found unfit vide letter dated 07.04.2014. The medical examination conducted at Allahabad Division by a single doctor who declared him fit was overruled by the medical board constituted by the Northern Railway, which found him unfit and was again SAHIL SHARMA declared unfit in special medical examination conducted by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Kanpur. Since, the duties of the ALP, being a safety category post, are directly linked with the safety of the public travelling in trains and keeping in view that the applicant has been declared unfit in A-1 category and further concealed the same facts while joining in the Railways, hence the applicant cannot be allowed to perform the duties of the post of ALP.
5. In the Rejoinder Affidavit, the applicant has reiterated his averments and submitted that the applicant is not aware of any complaint dated 21.07.2011 allegedly filed by a Chief Vigilance Commissioner and the same has not ever been served upon to the applicant by the respondents. Further, the applicant has not been issued the findings of the medical board dated 17.10.2011. After appearing before the medical board from 24.06.2011 to 01.07.2011, the applicant was directed to report back at Kanpur, where the he was regularly attending the office and his attendance was being made upto 23.02.2012. Thereafter, the respondents, without assigning any reasons, orally directed the applicant not to attend the office, since then the applicant was reporting for duty but his attendance was not marked. In response thereof, the applicant also made an application dated 20.03.2012 bringing out the entire facts and sought permission to attend his duties and regularize his services. If the allegations of the respondents in respect to applicant's unauthorized absence/absconding from duty were correct, the respondents would have issued a charge sheet for the same. It is further stated in the rejoinder affidavit that the respondents were adamant to declare the applicant unfit as the applicant was first declared unfit due to congenital heart anomaly, whereas in the medical examination dated 07.04.2014, the applicant was declared unfit due to defective vision. It is further reiterated that the respondents have no justification for terminating the applicant's services invoking the provisions of Rule 14 (ii) of Railway Servants (D&A) Rules, 1968, nor any reasons have been assigned as to why it was not practical to hold inquiry in the applicant's case.
6. Written submissions has also been filed by the learned counsel for the applicant stating therein that the applicant did appear in the medical examination conducted by the Ratlam Division, but he did not undergo any SAHIL SHARMA medical examination or pathological test and abandoned the same after receiving the information regarding his selection in ALP in Allahabad Division and was never issued any medical certificate/report that the applicant was not fit for the post of ALP. The applicant was never furnished with the report of the medical examination of Ratlam Division, Central Railway as well as inputs received against the applicant from CVC. The applicant has further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Tulsi Ram Patel (AIR 1985 Supreme Court Pg. 1416), wherein it has been held that the authorities should have assigned the reasons, as to why contemplation of disciplinary enquiry is not practically possible.
7. The respondents have also reiterated the averments by filing written submissions. Further, it is the contention of the respondents that the applicant was aware of the fact that he was not fit in A-1 medical category and the applicant concealed the fact. Subsequently, the applicant was issued a show cause notice dated 21.07.2014 requiring representation of the applicant within 10 days. In this regard, the applicant further filed a representation dated 30.07.2014 and after considering the representation of the applicant, the competent authority passed the penalty order dated 07.08.2014 dismissing the applicant from service. The applicant again preferred an appeal before the appellate authority, which was also dismissed vide order dated 09.03.2015. Against the said order, the applicant filed revision, which was also rejected by the respondents on 22.02.2016. The appellate authority has passed the order after providing personal hearing to the applicant exercising the power conferred under Rule 14 (ii) of Railway Servants (D&A) Rules, 1968 as held by Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Union of India and Ors Vs. Tulasi Ram Patel, 1985, AIR 1416. The respondents have further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Apex Court dated 12.05.2023 passed in Civil Appeal No. 6301 of 2013 (Dr. V.R. Sanal Kumar Vs. U.O.I. & Others)
8. Submissions of learned counsel for both the parties have been heard and records have been gone through.
9. It is noted that the applicant was selected for the post of ALP in Allahabad Division by the Railway Recruitment Board and after being SAHIL SHARMA declared medically fit in A-1 medical category, he was sent for requisite training from 08.01.2008 to 17.02.2009. After the training, the applicant was posted as ALP (Diesel) in Kanpur w.e.f. 17.02.2009. On receipt of a complaint from Chief Vigilance Commissioner, the applicant was directed to go to North Central Hospital, New Delhi for special medical examination. The Medical Board found him unfit for the post of ALP in A-1 medical category and found the applicant as having "Congenital Heart Anomaly". The applicant remained on unauthorized absence w.e.f. 22.02.2012. Thereafter, the applicant filed an Original Application No. 3109/2012 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench. The respondents were directed by the Tribunal to decide the representation of the applicant. The respondents issued a show cause notice dated 21.07.2014 to the applicant stating therein that the applicant, before joining Allahabad Division, had appeared in the medical examination conducted at Ratlam Division and was declared unfit and the same material facts were concealed by the applicant while joining at Allahabad Division as ALP. It was further stated that the applicant had sent an imposter during ECG test and due to alertness of the technician, the applicant was caught. The applicant left the medical examination and never reported back to the concerned authority. It is stated that by the respondents that the applicant was having enlarged heart and he was not fit for the job of ALP. Further, while proceeding for medical examination in Allahabad Division, the applicant declared that he was not examined and declared unfit for railway service by medical officer/medical board within the last three years. Based on the inputs received from CVC, the applicant was again subjected to medical examination wherein he was found unfit. Therefore, the respondents proposed to terminate the services of the applicant invoking Rule 14(ii) of RS (D&A) Rules, 1968 because holding enquiry was not practicable in the case of the applicant. The show cause notice dated 21.07.2014 is quoted as under:
"Sub: Proposal to take action under Rule 14 (ii) of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal Rule) -1968 You have filed OA No. 3109/2012 in Hon'ble CAT/NDLS wherein the Hon'ble CAT have directed the respondent to decide your representation Dt. 27.02.2012 & 22/03/2012. Your both above representations have already been decided by the DRM vide order No. P/RDG/ALPICNB/14 dtd. 03.07.2014. Thus, in compliance to directives of Hon'ble CAT, the issue regarding taking you on duty or otherwise has already been decided by DRM/ALD vide above mentioned order. Further, SAHIL SHARMA in regards to decide whether or not you will be retained in railway service, I have gone through the entire record and the facts placed before me and my observations are under-
You were appointed in North Central Railway Allahabad Division as Assistant Loco Pilot on 08.01.2008, after getting selected through RRB. Before your appointment, you were subjected to medical examination in Aye One category and were declared medically fit in Aye One catergory.
As per record available, it is seen that before joining in NCR, Allahabad division, your name was considered for Railway Service as ALP in Ratlam Division, Western Railway. You were sent for medical examination to Chief Medical Superintendent, Rallam. As per medical report given by Chief Medical superintendent, Ratlam your heart was found enlarged and your blood sugar was found 80 Mg/110. You had also sent an imposter for ECG but due to alertness of the ECG technician you were caught. Having come to know of this development, you did not report back in CMS/Ratlam. This report was given by CMS/Ratlam to Divisional Railway Manager, Ratlam vide letter. No. MD/CMS/55/4 PL VI dated 15. 10.2007. It is evident that your medical report was adverse and you were not fit for A-1 medical category and also for appointment in Railway service as Asstt. Loco Pilot. You had concealed this fact from the Railway adminishalion while applying for appointment as Asstt. Loco Pilot in Allahabad division, NC Railway.
While proceeding for Medical Examination to Railway Hospital, Allahabad, in Medical Memo No. 194667 daled 19.12.2007, you had declared that you were not examined and declared unfit for railway service by Medical Officer/Medical Board within the last three years. This was a wrong declaration given by you because you were medically examined in October 2007 in RTM Division of Western Railway This substantiates that you had concealed the fact that you were medically unfit for the post of ALP Based on the inputs given by CVC regarding your medical unfitness for the post of ALP, you were subjected to medical examination at Northern Railway, Central Hospital, New Delhi by a medical board constituted by the Northern Railway from 24.6.2011 to 3.7.2011. As per the Medical report dated 14.7.2011 of the medical board consisting of Chief ENT surgeon, Addl. CHD/Cardio. Addi CHD/Ophtho and Sr. DMO/Physician/CH/NDLS you are having congenital heart Anomaly i.e. Ebstein Anomaly. As per the report of the medical board you are unfit for the post of ALP in Aye-one medical category In compliance of Hon'ble CAT/Principle Bench/NDLS's directives, you were again subjected to medical examination by the Chief Medical Superintendent, Kanpur and you were found unfit for the post of ALP vide Medical Certificate No. 229618 dated 7.4.2014.
It is clear from the Medical Board and CMS/CNB's special medical examination report that you were not in Aye-one medical category and have managed to get the job of Asstt. Loco Pilot in Railways by concealing facts. The Medical examination conducted by a single doctor ie. Sr.DMO/N.C.Rly, Central Hospital, Allahabad who declared you fit for the post of ALP is overruled by the Medical Board constituted by Northern Railway which found you unfit in Aye- one category for the post of ALP.
The duties of ALP, is directly related with Public Safety and safety of trains operations. Since you are medically unfit for the post of ALP, you cannot be put to perform the duty of ALP which may out in danger the lives of the travelling public and may cause loss of Govt. property. Being a safety category post it is directly linked with the safety of the public travelling in trains. Keeping in view that you are having congenital heart anomaly i.e. Ebstein anomaly you cannot be SAHIL SHARMA allowed to perform the duties of ALP which may endanger the lives of thousands of passengers travelling in trains. You were having this problem before joining the Railways but you deliberately concealed the facts. This is very serious as not only you have concealed the facts, you have tried to play with safety also.
It is a matter of great concern that you were aware with your medical problem but you deliberately pressed the facts from Railway Administration as well as from Medical Authority and managed appointment Asst Loco Pilot in fraudulent manner by concealing the material facts at the time of medical examination. Your act to get the appointment is fraudulent In view of facts brought above, I have come to a conclusion that your retention in Railway service is not in Interest of administration and public interest. Therefore, I propose to terminate your services invoking rule 14(ii) of RS(D&A) Rules 1968 because holding enquiry is not practicable in your case. You are advised to submit your representation if you want to say anything in your defence within a period of 10 days. If you failed to submit your representation within stipulated period of 10 days ex- parte decision in the case will be taken."
In response, the applicant filed a representation before the respondents stating therein that though the applicant appeared in the medical examination conducted in Ratlam Division, he abandoned the same as the applicant got to know about his selection in the Allahabad Division on the same post. The applicant has further reiterated that he was not aware of the medical reports of the Ratlam Division as he never received such reports. The CVC inputs, based on which the applicant was issued the show cause notice, were also never served to applicant. The applicant definitely appeared before the Northern Central Hospital, New Delhi, but was never provided with the said reports. With regard to the applicant's fitness, the applicant was declared fit in the medical examination conducted by the Allahabad Division and was discharging his duties as ALP faithfully without fail. Hence, the applicant has not concealed any material fact. He has also prayed that if he is unfit in A-1 medical category, he may be provided alternative job.
10. Vide order dated 07.08.2014, the representation made by the applicant dated 30.07.2014 was rejected reiterating the averments made in the show cause notice dated 21.07.2014 and the services of the applicant were dismissed in the interest of administration and public interest under Rule 14(ii) of DAR Rules. The relevant portion of the order dated 07.08.2014 is quoted as under:
......The duties of ALP, is directly related with Public Safety and safety of trains operations. Since you are medically unfit for the post of ALP, you cannot be put to perform the duty of ALP which may put in danger the lives of the travelling public and may cause loss of Govt. SAHIL SHARMA property. Being a safety category post it is directly linked with the safety of the public traveling in trains. Keeping in view that you are having congenital heart anomaly i.e. Ebstein anomaly you cannot be allowed to perform the duties of ALP which may endanger the lives thousands of passengers traveling in trains. You were having this problem before joining the Railways but deliberately concealed the facts. This is very serious as not only you have concealed the facts, you have tried to play with safety also.
It is a matter of great concern that you were aware with your medical problem but you deliberately suppressed the facts from Railway Administration as well as from Medical Authority and managed appointment as Asst. Loco Pilot in fraudulent manner by concealing the material facts at the time of medical examination. Your act to get the appointment is fraudulent.
In view of facts brought above, I have come to a conclusion that your retention in Railway service is not in the interest of administration and public interest. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the ends of justice will be met with if you are dismissed from Railway service. Accordingly, I dismiss you from Railway service...."
The applicant vide his representation dated 16.09.2014, appealed against the removal order dated 07.08.2014, the same was dismissed by the competent authority vide its letter dated 09.03.2015 after giving a chance of personal interview to the applicant. Again, a revision was preferred by the applicant dated 23.04.2015, which came to be rejected vide order of the competent authority dated 22.02.2016 after again giving a chance of hearing the applicant in personal capacity on 19.01.2016.
11. The respondents have stated in the orders that the applicant had not presented any new facts/arguments in the case, hence the services were dismissed by the respondents by rejecting the appeals made by the applicant in respect of the orders of dismissal. It is the contention of the applicant that the respondents have not justified why it was not practicable to hold an inquiry in the case of the applicant while invoking of Rule 14(ii) of DAR Rules, 1968.
12. It is a fact that the applicant has been dismissed from service under Rule 14 (ii) of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968. Before dismissing the applicant from service, a detailed show cause notice had been issued to him giving reasons for invoking Rule 14(ii) of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968. From the records, it is seen that the applicant appeared for medical examination at Ratlam Division in August/September, 2007 for the post of ALP. The same is also mentioned in his Original Application and in his representation against the show cause notice. However, he abandoned the medical examination there. The version of the applicant is that he came to Allahabad to appear in the medical examination for the post of ALP because of his personal preference to SAHIL SHARMA Allahabad. It is not clear upto what stage the applicant had undergone medical examination at Ratlam but it is noted from the letter dated 15.10.2007 of Divisional Hospital Ratlam addressed to DRM, Western Railway Ratlam that the applicant was registered for medical examination for A-1 medical category and his chest Xray and fasting blood sugar was done on 03.09.2007. In his Xray, his heart was found enlarged. As per the said letter, the applicant sent some person as imposter for ECG but he was caught due to the alertness of ECG technician and the applicant disappeared from the Railway Hospital, Ratlam thereafter. The applicant did not disclose this information while undergoing medical test at Allahabad. When the applicant was referred to Medical Board in New Delhi, the same findings were recorded in the report of the Medical Board. It is recorded in the report dated 17.10.2011 of Northern Railway Central Hospital, New Delhi that the applicant is having congenital heart anomaly i.e. Ebstein Anomaly and he is unfit for the job of ALP in A-1 medical category. The Disciplinary Authority, in its show cause notice dated 21.07.2014, has given detailed facts of the case for invoking rule 14 (ii) of Railway Servants (Disciplinary & Appeal) Rules, 1968. Subsequently, the Appellate Authority has also given the opportunity of personal hearing to the applicant before rejecting the appeal of the applicant.
13. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Jainendra Singh Vs. State of U.P in Civil Appeal No. 5671/2012 (SLP (C) No. 28608/2011) has held as under:, "31. As noted by us, all the above decisions were rendered by a Division Bench of this Court consisting of two-Judges and having bestowed our serious consideration to the issue, we consider that while dealing with such an issue, the Court will have to bear in mind the various cardinal principles before granting any relief to the aggrieved party, namely:
(i) Fraudulently obtained orders of appointment could be legitimately treated as voidable at the option of the employer or could be recalled by the employer and in such cases merely because the respondent employee has continued in service for a number of years, on the basis of such fraudulently obtained employment, cannot get any equity in his favour or any estoppel against the employer....
.....(iv) A candidate having suppressed material information and/or giving false information cannot claim right to continue in service and the employer, having regard to the nature of employment as well as other aspects, has the discretion to terminate his services. Purpose of calling for information regarding involvement in any criminal case or detention or conviction is for the purpose of verification of the character/antecedents at the time of recruitment and suppression of such material information will have clear bearing on the character and antecedents of the candidate in relation to his continuity in service....
.....(viii) An employee on probation can be discharged from service or may be refused employment on the ground of suppression of material information or making false statement relating to his involvement in the criminal case, conviction SAHIL SHARMA or detention, even if ultimately he was acquitted of the said case, inasmuch as such a situation would make a person undesirable or unsuitable for the post.
14. In view of the above, no interference by this Tribunal is warranted in the orders passed by the respondents. The applicant was aware of his medical condition in August/September, 2007 when he reported for medical examination in Ratlam. He concealed this information at the time of his medical examination at Allahabad. Therefore, the instant OA is liable to be dismissed and is Dismissed. No order as to costs.
15. Interim Order, if any, stands discharged.
All the related MAs stand disposed of.
(Anjani Nandan Sharan) (Justice Rajiv Joshi)
Member (A) Member (J)
Sahil/-
SAHIL SHARMA