ORDER :

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2. Both the petitioners were proceeded against for major punishment under Dhanbad Rail Departmental Proceeding Nos. 71 of 2003 and 74 of 2003 for the charges of indiscipline, violation of rules, dereliction of duty and the act of cowardice. They were posted on 14.04.2003 at Chandrapura Rail Police Station as armed personnel. As per the Police Manual Rule 425-2(ka), they were responsible for protection of their arms and ammunition, failure of which on their part, entailed loss of government property. Under the instant Rule arms and ammunition were to be kept in chain with their uniform and not to be thrown uncared in barrack. Had they taken such care and conformed to the rules, loss of government property would not have occurred. On that day 150 armed extremists attacked the barrack from all sides but petitioners were not alert and up to the task to face the challenge, which entailed loss of image of Police and government property. These extremists took away government property like Rifle, Bullets, Stengun, magazine, cash and uniforms of the personnel of the police force and also caused damage. Petitioners did not act or retaliate, which was an act of cowardice on their part.

3. This matter was inquired by the Police Inspector, Railway Circle, Gomoh who found the petitioners responsible. A disciplinary proceedings were initiated thereafter. Enquiry Officer was the then Sergent Major, Rail, Dhanbad. Prosecution witnesses Arjun Ram, the then Police Inspector, Gomoh; Sri Gariban Ram, the then Deputy Superintendent of Police(2), Dhanbad and Sri Om Prakash Prasad, the then Confidential Reader, Office of Superintendent of Police, Rail, Dhanbad supported the charges in their statement. Defence took the plea that they were not part of the armed police force. Deployment of armed police force is undertaken for escort duty as per need. No armed police force was deputed for security of the Kot. On 13.04.2003 Petitioner No.2 was deputed for escorting Train No. 8621 up and 8622 down. After that duty he returned on 14.04.2003 at 5.30, deposited the rifle and ammunition in the Kot and went to take rest, as on 14.04.2003 also he was deputed to escort train no. 8623 up and 8624 down. No arrangement was made for protection of the armoury by senior police officials except a Lathi Constable. The Officer In-charge of the Police Station was in civil dress working at the Police Station and at the time of the incident he also ran and took shelter in the barrack. In the explosion caused by the extremists the Officer In-charge sustained minor injury. The extremists broke open the door of the Kot, entered the armoury and took away arms and ammunition. The Inquiry Officer however in his report found the charges established and opined that their misconduct was of serious nature. The Disciplinary authority, Superintendent of Police, Rail, Dhanbad thereafter passed the order of punishment vide memo no. 1401 and 1396 dated 31.12.2005 against the petitioners reducing them to the basic scale of pay for 3 years and that they would not be entitled to anything beyond what they have got during this period of suspension.

4. Petitioner no.1 had approached this Court against the order of punishment in W.P.S. No. 4257 of 2006 but the case was disposed of vide order dated 31.08.2006 with a direction to the appellate authority, Deputy Inspector General (Rail), Ranchi to dispose of the appeal within 3 months. The appellate authority by order dated 08.01.2007 after consideration of the grounds urged by the petitioners, inquiry report and the materials found during inquiry did not find any merit in the appeal, which was accordingly rejected. The appellate authority was of the opinion that the conduct of the petitioners were of very serious nature for which they deserved dismissal from service but the disciplinary authority had imposed a punishment of reduction to the basic scale of pay for the period of 3 years only. As such, no int