IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
RAVI NATH TILHARI, CHALLA GUNARANJAN, JJ.
B. Krishna Kumar - Petitioner
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.No.8434 of 2012
Decided on : 07-08-2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. understanding of the events leading to disciplinary action (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. arguments presented by the petitioner regarding jurisdiction and procedure (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. clarification of appointing authorities and their roles (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26) |
| 4. analysis of compliance with the vigilance manual (Para 27 , 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36) |
| 5. impact of the enquiry officer's role and independence (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40 , 41 , 42 , 43 , 44 , 45 , 46 , 47) |
| 6. requirements for fair inquiry and implications of breaches (Para 48 , 49 , 50 , 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55 , 56) |
| 7. essentials of appellate consideration as per statutory requirements (Para 57 , 58 , 59 , 60 , 61 , 62 , 63 , 64) |
| 8. conclusion on the proceedings' fairness and legality (Para 65 , 66 , 67 , 68 , 69) |
| 9. final resolution and implications for the petitioner (Para 70 , 71 , 72 , 73 , 74 , 75 , 76) |
JUDGMENT :
Ravi Nath Tilhari, J.
Heard Sri K.R.K.V. Prasad, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Venna Hemanth Kumar, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondents 1 to 6.
2. The petitioner was the applicant in O.A.No.958 of 2011 (in short OA) before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad (in short, the Tribunal). The same was dismissed on 15.02.2012 and challenging the said judgment, the present writ petition was filed.
3. The petitioner shall be referred as the applicant and the respondent as the respondent.
I. FACTS:
4. The applicant was appointed as Peon in Vijaywada Division of South Central Railways. He was later on promoted to the post of Junior Clerk-cum-Typist, after the said promotion panel was approved by the Additional Divisional Railway Manager, Vijayawada Division, South Central Railway-2nd respondent in terms of the proceedings dated 13.03.1997 issued by the 3rd respondent-the Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, Vijayawada Division. While working as Junior Clerk (Mechanical Bills), pursuant to a Vigilance trap dated 28.10.2009 the applicant was served with a charge memo vide Memorandum No.B/P227/IV/2009/3/Vig., dated 14.12.2009 by the 5th respondent the Senior Divisional Personal Officer, Guntakal Division, with respect to the demand and receipt of illegal gratification of Rs.500/- from one Smt G. Parameswari (the complainant) to process her Provident Fund withdrawal application.
5. The Article of Charge against the applicant reads as under:
"ANNEXURE TO STANDARD FORM No.5
The Memorandum of Charge Sheet under Rule – 9 of the RS (D&A) Rules, 1968:
ANNEXURE-I
ARTICLE OF CHARGE FRAMED AGAINST SHRI.B.KRISHNA KUMAR, Jr. Clerk/Mech., Bills, Sr.DPO/O/BZA.
Article(i)
That the said Shri. B.Krishna Kumar, Jr. Clerk, Mechanical Bills, Sr. DPO/O/BZA while working as such on 28.10.2009 had committed serious misconduct in that he had demanded and collected an amount of Rs.500/- as illegal gratification from Smt. G. Parameswari, Welder Gr.I, Wagon Depot/BZA to process her Provident Fund withdrawal application dt. 16.10.2009 as detailed in the statement of imputations.
Thus, the said Shri. B. Krishna Kumar had failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Railway Servant and has violated Rule No.3(1)(i),(ii) & (iii) and Rule 26 of Railway Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966."
6. The applicant was given an intra Divisional transfer from Vijayawada Division to Guntakal Division.
7. The applicant submitted reply dated 04.01.2010 to the charge memo to the 5th respondent denying the allegations. Not being satisfied with the reply, the 5th respondent considered to conduct enquiry and nominated the 6th respondent as the Enquiry Officer to enquire into the charges. However, any presenting officer was not appointed.
8. The Enquiry Officer submitted the report to the Disciplinary Authority holding the charge as proved and the Disciplinary Authority forwarded the copy of the report of the Investigating Officer to the applicant
Krishna Kumar v. Divisional Assistant Electrical Engineer and others
Moni Shankar v. Union of India
Ram Chander vs. Union of India and others
Procedural violations in disciplinary hearings, such as lack of impartiality and proper inquiry conduct, invalidate removal from service and necessitate quashing of disciplinary orders.
Judicial review in disciplinary proceedings limited to procedural fairness and natural justice; non-statutory vigilance manual violations do not vitiate inquiry without proven prejudice; no re-apprec....
Vigilance department cannot appoint its own officers as enquiry officers in disciplinary proceedings to ensure impartiality and natural justice.
Departure from regular disciplinary enquiry under Rule 14(ii) requires reasoned satisfaction of impracticability; mere staff anger insufficient, mandating compliance with natural justice and Article ....
Disciplinary proceedings against a member of the Railway Protection Force must be conducted in accordance with the Railway Protection Force Rules and the principles of natural justice.
The court emphasized the importance of following principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings and allowed the objection about the non-appointment of the Presenting Officer, leading to th....
Disciplinary proceedings must adhere to natural justice principles; findings based on evidence are upheld unless proven perverse.
Point of law: Whenever an inquiring authority is to be appointed for conducting enquiry under the said rules, they are also requested to bring these instructions to the notice of their subordinates f....
Departure from regular disciplinary inquiry under Rule 14(ii) RS(D&A) Rules requires specific recorded reasons for impracticability; vague satisfaction invalidates removal order, especially with crim....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.