Back
2000 Supreme(Cal) 521
High Court Of Calcutta
SAMARESH BANERJEE, AMITAVA LALA
CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER, S.E.RAILWAY - Appellant
Versus
RAMPATI SINGH - Respondent
F. M. A. T. 2318 Of 1994
Decided On : 09/29/2000
Disciplinary proceedings against a railway employee were vitiated by procedural irregularities and the findings of the Enquiry Officer were perverse. The employee was entitled to the entire arrear salaries and benefits from the date of dismissal till reinstatement.
Headnote:
RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE - Disciplinary Proceedings - Enquiry Officer's Findings - Perversity - Natural Justice - Non-Supply of List of Documents and Witnesses - Non-Supply of Adverse Findings of Assistant Security Officer - Final Order - Non-Application of Mind - Appellate Order - Non-Independent Consideration of Evidence - Violation of Principles of Natural Justice - Arrear Salaries and Benefits.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Head Rakshak of the Railway Protection Force, was charged with serious neglect of duty, slack supervision, and misconduct for failing to prevent or detect the theft of wheat bags from railway wagons. The disciplinary proceedings resulted in his dismissal from service.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the disciplinary proceedings were vitiated by several procedural irregularities, including the non-supply of a list of documents and witnesses to the petitioner, the non-supply of the adverse findings of the Assistant Security Officer, and the failure of the disciplinary and appellate authorities to properly consider the evidence and apply their minds to the case. The court also found that the findings of the Enquiry Officer were perverse and not based on evidence.
Issues: 1. Whether the disciplinary proceedings were vitiated by procedural irregularities? 2. Whether the findings of the Enquiry Officer were perverse? 3. Whether the petitioner was entitled to the entire arrear salaries and benefits from the date of dismissal till reinstatement?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the disciplinary proceedings were vitiated by procedural irregularities, including the non-supply of a list of documents and witnesses to the petitioner, the non-supply of the adverse findings of the Assistant Security Officer, and the failure of the disciplinary and appellate authorities to properly consider the evidence and apply their minds to the case. The court found that these irregularities violated the principles of natural justice and rendered the proceedings invalid. 2. The court held that the findings of the Enquiry Officer were perverse and not based on evidence. The court found that the Enquiry Officer had relied on surmises and conjectures rather than evidence to reach his conclusions. 3. The court held that the petitioner was entitled to the entire arrear salaries and benefits from the date of dismissal till reinstatement, since the disciplinary proceedings had been quashed and he had been reinstated in service.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitioner's appeal, quashed the disciplinary proceedings, and directed the respondents to pay the petitioner the entire arrear salaries and benefits to which he would have been entitled had he continued in service, from the date of removal from service till reinstatement in service, with interest calculated per annum.
( 1 ) ).-BOTH the appeals having arisen out of the same judgment and order passed in Civil Rule No. 4822 (W)/77, the same have been, heard analogously and will be governed by the same judgment. Both the appeals having arisen out of the same judgment and order passed in Civil Rule No. 4822 (W)/77, the same have been, heard analogously and will be governed by the same judgment.
( 2 ) THE writ petitioner, who is the appellant in F. M. A. T. No. 2318/94 moved a writ application challenging the entire disciplinary proceeding initiated against him, including the finding of the Enquiry Officer, the second show cause notice, the final order passed thereunder as also the appellate order dismissing the writ petitioner from service.
( 3 ) THE disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner, who was a head Rakshak of the Railway Protection Force at Adra, South Eastern Railway on the following charges :-"ex. Md. Rj. 2689 R. P. Singh was chargesheeted under the Rule 44 of KPF Rules by ASO/adra. The charges and statement of allegation read as follows :-'charge' Serious neglect of duty slack supervision and misconduct in that Hd. R. K. 2689 R. P. Singh while on party NCO duty from 08/08 hrs. at Burnpur Yard on 14. 4. 75. 3 (three) bags of wheat were recovered by Sri K. S. S. Dutta, SI/rpf/burnpur from Burnpur Yard at about 03/00 hrs. in between line No. 5 and 6. 3 (three) open box wagons containing wheat covered with tarpoline Nos. SE 68343, SE 59580 and SE 8573 all Ex. HOM to Samastipur contg. 700 kgs. wheat each were standing in line No. 3 just adjacent to these recovered bags which were evidently stolen from the above wagons. The Md. Rk. failed to prevent or detect the offence. He was found standing suspiciously along with beat duty Rk. 6694 P. B. Verma and RK. 1727 R. K. Singh and seal checking duty 6317 N. C. Banerjee at the time of recovery by the S. I. at a distance 20/25 of yards away from the recovered bags. Statement of allegation : md. Rk. 2689 R. P. Singh while on party NCO duty at Burnpur yard on 14. 4. 75 there bags of wheat were recovered by Sri K. S. S. Dutta, SL/rpf/burnpur from Burnpur Yard at about 03/00 hrs. in between line No. 5 and 6. Three open box wagons contg. wheat covered with tarpoline Nos. SE 68343, SE 59580 all Ex. HOM To Samastipur contg. 700 bags wheat each were standing in line No. 3 just adjacent to these recovered bags. Thus it was evident that recovered bags were stolen from the above wagons which he failed to prevent or detect. Rather he was found standing suspiciously along with beat duty RK. 6694 R. B. Verma and Rk. 1727 R. N. Singh and seal checking duty Rk. 6694 R. B. Verma and R. K. 1727 R. N. Singh and seal cheaking duty R. K. 6317 N. C. Banerjee at the time of recovery 20/25 yards away from the recovered bags. This amounts to serious neglect of duty, slack supervision and misconduct on his part and hence the charge. "
( 4 ) BY the impugned judgment and order dated 9th March, 1994, Ajit Kumar Sengupta, J. was pleased to allow the writ application making the Rule absolute and quashing all the impugned orders. The petitioner was also directed to be reinstated in service and it was further directed that he will be entitled to arrear salaries calculated at the rate of 25% of the total emoluments which he would have been entitled to, had he been in service from the date of dismissal till the date of reinstatement.
( 5 ) THE writ petitioner has preferred the appeal being FMAT No. 2318 of 1994 only against the aforesaid portion of the order by which His Lordship after directing his reinstatement in service further directed that the petitioner will be entitled only to 25% of arrear salaries.
( 6 ) THE main contention of the appellant/petitioner is that entire disciplinary proceeding including the final order and the appellate order rightly having been quashed there is no reason why the petitioner would not be paid the entire arrear salaries and other benefits.
( 7 ) THE o
