Per KANADE V.M., J.: - The petitioner has filed this petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and the following prayers are made which are reproduced as under:

(a)"That the Honble High Court be pleased to issue a writ of certiorari or a writ of mandamus or order or direction in the nature of certiorari calling for records and proceedings in the OA 95/99 and RP 18/03 and quashing and setting aside the impugned order dt. 31-1-2003 and compulsory retirement order dt. 28-5-2003 and praying for reinstatement on the post as Sr. Motorman with full back wages, as if periods spent on duty,

(b)(b) That the Honble High Court be pleased to club this petition with Writ Petition 4608/02 pending in this Honble High Court,

(c)That the Honble High Court be pleased to expedite the petition,

(d)For any other relief Honble Court may deemed fit to grant,

(e)The cost of this petition may please be granted,

(f)Rules to be issued and records and proceedings be called for."

2. Brief facts which are relevant for the purpose of adjudicating the dispute in the present case are as under :-

3. The petitioner joined Western Railway as an Apprentice on 15th February, 1965. He completed his Apprenticeship training on 24th February, 1969 and was appointed as motorman on 15th March, 1969. It is the case of the petitioner that his grandfather owned a piece and parcel of land admeasuring 2027 square yards at Cadel Road, Mahim. Petitioners grandfather expired in 1945 and the property was divided between two sons of his grandfather and his father became owner of about 735 square yards of property in 1947. According to the petitioner, his father got the plan sanctioned for construction of 13 flats on that plot of land and started development of the property in 1962. However, the development could not be completed as the petitioners father expired on 22nd April 1968. On the death of the petitioners father, his brother became the karta of the Hindu Undivided Family property. However, since his brother migrated to the United Kingdom in 1962, the petitioner was given Power of Attorney to act on his behalf as karta of Hirrdu Undivided Family property. It is the case of the petitioner that even before the petitioner became motorman on 15th March, 1959, the Undivided Hindu Family Property devolved on the petitioner and his brother. In 1986, an inquiry was initiated against the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner had failed to inform and abide by Rule 18(1) under Railway Service (Conduct) Rules, 1966. This enquiry, however, was closed by Memorandum dated 11th May, 1987. It is the case of the petitioner that railway authorities were fully aware with the fact that he inherited the landed property and after development of the property, the flats were sold by him and that the property was completely developed in the year 1980 and thereafter, the proceedings which were initiated for non-compliance of Rule 18(1) were dropped. Thereafter again, a second charge sheet was issued on 18th December, 1992. It was alleged that the petitioner had not complied with Rule 18(1) and 18(2) by not informing and obtaining prior permission for developing the property and thereafter, selling the flats which were constructed by him. Charge sheet was issued in December, 1992. The inquiry was commenced on 24th June, 1994 and it concluded on 20th September, 1995. The Inquiry Officer submitted his findings on 7th October, 1996 and found the petitioner guilty of violation of Conduct Rules as alleged in the charge-sheet. On the basis of his opinion and on the basis of evidence produced before the Enquiry Officer, an order of removal was passed by respondent No.4 on 16th April, 1997. Against this order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Appellate Authority. His appeal also was dismissed by the Appellate Authority.

4. The petitioner thereafter preferred an application to the Central Administrative Tribunal which was partly allowed and CAT passed an Order dated 31st

Click Here to Read the rest of this document