Back
2024 Supreme(Raj) 301
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
SHREE CHANDRASHEKHAR, KULDEEP MATHUR, JJ.
Union of India – Appellant
Versus
Bhawani Singh Tanwar S/o Sh. Gulab Singh – Respondent
D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 13242 of 2023
Decided on : 01-08-2024
For the Appellant : Mr. Bhanu Pratap Bohra
For the Respondent: Mr. J.K. Kaushik
IMPORTANT POINT
The termination of an employee's service based on a vigilance inquiry, without conducting a proper disciplinary proceeding and without adhering to the principles of natural justice, is unlawful.
Headnote:
RAILWAYS - TERMINATION OF SERVICE - IRMM 2000, PARA 512 (2) SUB NOTE (ii) - The court discussed the provisions of the Indian Railways Medical Manual, 2000, particularly para 512 (2) Sub note (ii), which pertains to medical fitness for employment. The court interpreted that the termination of the respondent's service based solely on a vigilance inquiry, without conducting a proper disciplinary proceeding, violated principles of natural justice. The court emphasized that the employer must adhere to the recommendations of medical experts and cannot act arbitrarily based on external inquiries.
Fact of the Case:
The respondent, Bhawani Singh, was appointed as a Pointsman 'B' in the Railways after passing all qualifying tests. He was later promoted to Pointsman 'A'. Following a medical examination, he was found to have defective color vision and was subsequently absorbed into a Clerk position. His services were terminated after a vigilance inquiry suggested malingering regarding his color vision, without conducting a disciplinary proceeding.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the termination was arbitrary and violated the principles of natural justice. The Tribunal's decision to reinstate the respondent was upheld, as the Railways failed to provide a proper hearing or establish any misconduct.
Issues: Whether the termination of the respondent's services was justified based on the findings of a vigilance inquiry without conducting a disciplinary proceeding, and whether the principles of natural justice were violated.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that a termination order based on a vigilance inquiry, without following the due process outlined in The Railways Servants (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968, is invalid. The employer must provide a reasonable opportunity to the employee to defend against any charges before termination.
Final Decision: The Writ Petition filed by the Railways was dismissed, and the order of the Tribunal to reinstate the respondent with all consequential benefits was upheld.
ORDER
Hon’ble Justice Kuldeep Mathur, J.
1. This Writ Petition has been filed by the petitioner-Railways assailing order dated 31.05.2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench Jodhpur (for short ‘the Tribunal’) in O.A. No.0290/00226/2019, whereby the O.A. filed by respondent- Bhawani Singh has been allowed.
2. Succinctly stated, facts of the present case are that respondent-Bhawani Singh after passing all the qualifying tests, came to be appointed as yatayat khalasi against the post of Pointsman ‘B’ under the Railways w.e.f. 29/30.07.2013. The post of Pointsman ‘B’ comes under ‘safety’ category. In due course of time, the respondent came to be promoted on the post of Pointsman ‘A’. During the periodical/routine medical checkup of the railway employees conducted on 27.12.2016, the Medical Board constituted at Railway Hospital, Jodhpur found him to be possessing ‘defective colour vision with suspected malingering’ and declared him unfit for the posts under A-2 category but declared him fit to be appointed on the posts under B-2 and below categories. The Medical Board thus recommended the respondent for alternate appointment on medical grounds with a special mention that he should only get appointed in an unattractive post as per para 512 (2) Sub note (ii) of Indian Railways Medical Manual, 2000 (hereinafter referred to as IRMM, 2000). As per the recommendation of the Medical Board, the respondent was thereafter absorbed on the post of Clerk vide order dated 04.08.2017 and he thus joined his duties at Jalore.
3. Vide letter dated 16.11.2017, the respondent was again directed to appear for the medical examination to be held on 18.11.2017 at Railway Hospital, Jaipur and subsequently, he was sent for further medical examination to S.M.S. Hospital, Jaipur. The Medical Board of S.M.S. Hospital, Jaipur after considering the entire medical history of the respondent, vide its report dated 04.01.2018, declared him to be possessing ‘defective colour vision with established malingering’. In the month of 2019, the respondent was apprised of a vigilance case/inquiry pending against him and in pursuance of the same he, of his own accord got himself medically tested from M.D.M. Hospital Jodhpur on 22.05.2019. In the medical examination conducted at M.D.M. Hospital Jodhpur, the respondent was again declared to be possessing ‘defective colour vision’. The services of the respondent were thereafter terminated from the Railways vide office order/letter dated 10.09.2019 on the ground that he was unfit for employment on all the posts as he had been declared to be ‘a case of established malingering for colour vision’.
4. The respondent being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the order of termination dated 10.09.2019 filed Original Application No.0290/00226/2019 the learned Tribunal alleging inter alia that no disciplinary proceedings were conducted against him and without giving him an opportunity of hearing, an order having civil and evil consequences has been passed arbitrarily, without following the due process of law. He further stated that he was given appointment on the post of Pointsman ‘B’ after having successfully qualified all the requisite tests and further on having been declared to be a person with ‘defective colour vision with suspected malingering’, and therefore he was provided alternate, unattractive appointment as Clerk. Therefore, there was no reason or occasion available with the respondents for terminating his services, merely on the basis of the fact finding inquiry conduced by the Vigilance Department.
5. The learned Tribunal after hearing the counsel for the parties and after perusing the documents available on record, vide order dated 31.05.2023, was pleased to allow the said O.A. and directed the Railways to reinstate the respondent on the post of Clerk with all the consequential benefits, including arrears of pay and allowances. The reasonings assigned by the learned Tribunal in para Nos. 9 and 10 of its judgm
