Back
S. V. GANGAPURWALA, SANDEEP V. MARNE
Sachin Kumar S/o. Vedpal Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, Through the Ministry of Railways, Having its Head office at : Room No. 239, Rail Bhawn, Raisina Road, CP, New Delhi – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sandeep V. Marne, J.
1. Petitioner, an ex-Constable in the Railway Protection Force (RPF), is aggrieved by the Order dated 15th January, 2019 dismissing him from service by dispensing with the enquiry. He also aggrieved by rejection of his appeal by order dated 19th September, 2019.
2. Petitioner was enrolled as a member in RPF on 01st August, 2015 and was appointed on the post of Constable. On 12th December, 2018, he was deployed for platform duty between 7.00 Hrs. to 15.00 Hrs. at Grant Road Railway Station. A complaint was lodged by two passengers against him alleging demand and acceptance of Rs. 12,000/- as illegal gratification by threatening them. It is alleged that the Government Railway Police (GRP) summoned petitioner, when he returned the amount of Rs. 12,000/- to the passengers, on account of which the GRP did not book him.
3. It appears that the fact a finding Enquiry was conducted and a report was submitted by the Inspector, RPF, Mumbai Central. Based on the report so submitted, Senior Divisional Security Commissioner, RPF, Mumbai Central passed Order dated 15th January, 2019 dismissing petitioner from service observing that it was not reasonably practicable to
Dismissal without inquiry violates natural justice and requires satisfactory justification under CISF Rules and Article 311 of the Constitution.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for clear reasons and objective criteria when dispensing with a departmental enquiry under Rule 161(ii) of the Railway Protection F....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for clear reasons and objective criteria for dispensing with the ordinary procedure for holding an enquiry, as well as the need for....
Dismissal under Article 311(2)(b) invalid without cogent, objective reasons showing inquiry impracticable; FIR involvement and witness fear presumptions insufficient if criminal probe exonerates empl....
Dismissal from service matter - Rule 23 of Rules of 1991 clearly indicate that provisions of Revision are not mandatory in nature and are clearly at discretion of Officer whose appeal has been reject....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that holding an inquiry is a rule while dispensing with it is an exception, and the reasons for dispensing with the inquiry must be sufficient and ....
(1) Dismissal from service without conducting departmental inquiry – It is duty of disciplinary authority to record satisfaction how and in what manner holding an enquiry is not reasonably practicabl....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
