Back
PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT
D.Falshaw and Tek Chand JJ.
Railway Board, New Delhi
Versus
Niranjan Singh Bela Singh
Letter Patent Appeal No. 38 of 1962,
Decided On : JANUARY 14, 1963
CONSTITUTIONAL LAW - ARTICLE 19 - FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND EXPRESSION - RAILWAY ADMINISTRATION - PROHIBITION OF MEETINGS ON RAILWAY PREMISES - VALIDITY - INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS - DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST EMPLOYEE FOR PARTICIPATING IN MEETINGS ON RAILWAY PREMISES - VALIDITY.
Fact of the Case:
Niranjan Singh, a permanent servant of the Northern Railway, was prominently engaged in trade union activities and was served with a charge sheet alleging serious misconduct. The first charge was that he was instrumental in forcing the shutting down of an air compressor, causing disruption in the working of the railway shops. The second charge was that he had contravened orders by participating and addressing meetings held outside the Main Time Office of the railway shops on several occasions. An enquiry committee was appointed to hold an inquiry, and they found that the first charge was not established beyond reasonable doubt, but that Narinjan Singh had contravened the order by participating and addressing the meetings. The General Manager, after reviewing the enquiry proceedings, agreed with the view of the D.G.M. (P) that the evidence was incomplete and sent the case back to the Enquiry Committee for further consideration. The Enquiry Committee, after further examination of witnesses, reaffirmed their original findings. The General Manager then issued a show cause notice to Narinjan Singh why he should not be removed from service in respect of the findings on both charges. After considering Narinjan Singh's reply to the show cause notice, the General Manager ordered his removal from service. The Railway Board dismissed Narinjan Singh's appeal. Narinjan Singh filed a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, challenging the orders removing him from service.
Finding of the Court:
The Single Judge accepted Narinjan Singh's writ petition and set aside the orders removing him from service. The Single Judge held that the finding of the General Manager against Narinjan Singh on the first charge violated the principles of natural justice, and that the instructions which the petitioner was alleged to have contravened by addressing meetings in railway premises without permission of the authorities were themselves a contravention of Article 19 of the Constitution.
Issues: 1. Whether the General Manager's finding against Narinjan Singh on the first charge violated the principles of natural justice? 2. Whether the instructions prohibiting meetings on railway premises were a contravention of Article 19 of the Constitution?
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the General Manager's finding against Narinjan Singh on the first charge violated the principles of natural justice. The Court found that the evidence against Narinjan Singh was weak and that the General Manager had failed to give proper consideration to the evidence before reaching his decision. 2. The Court held that the instructions prohibiting meetings on railway premises were not a contravention of Article 19 of the Constitution. The Court held that an employer can prohibit union meetings on its own premises, and that this applies to the government as an employer. The Court distinguished the case from the Supreme Court decision in Kameshwar Prasad V/s. State of Bihar, AIR 1962 SC 1166, which held that a rule prohibiting government servants from participating in demonstrations or strikes was unconstitutional. The Court held that the ban on meetings on railway premises was not absolute, as meetings could still be held on open ground with the permission of the railway authorities.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Railway Board and the General Manager, and upheld the Single Judge's order setting aside the orders removing Narinjan Singh from service.
D.Falshaw, J.
1. This appeal has been filed by the Railway Board and the General Manager of the Northern Railway against the order of a Single Judge accepting petition filed by the respondent Niranjan Singh under Article 226 of the Constitution and setting aside an order of the General Manager removing Narinjan Singh from service which was upheld by the Railway Board in appeal.
2. There seems to be no doubt about the fact that Narinjan Singh, a permanent servant of the Northern Rail way of several years service, was prominently engaged in trade Union activities and on the 7th of November 1953 he was served with a charge sheet alleging serious misconduct. The first charge was that he was instrumental in forcing the shutting down at about 8.15 A.M. on the 31st of May 1956 of tie 2500 e.f.m. air compressor in the Fast Compressor House adjacent to the Blacksmith shop causing thereby disruption in the working of the C. and W. Shops, Alambagh, Lucknow. The second charge was that on five occasions, which are listed, he had contravened the orders, issued under the General Managers letter dated the 19th of June 1956 by participating and addressing meetings held outside the Main Time Office of the C. and W. Shops on the mornings of the 23rd and 25th cf June and the 24th, 25th and 27th of July 1956. Three officers of the Railway, Mr. T. C. Chadda, President, and Mr. N V. Murthy and Mr. M. P. Bahadur, were appointed to hold the enquiry and as a result of the proceedings held on three dates In January 1957 they drew up and submitted their findings for the consideration of the General Manager to the effect that they did not consider the first charge relating to the shutting dnwrt of the air compressor to be established beyond all reasonable doubt, but that Narinjan Singh had contravened the order by participating and addressing the meetings regarding which tie was charged.
3. On the 26th of March 1957 Mr. M. K. Kaul, General Manager, recorded an order [annexure C to the writ petition) to the effect that he had read through the enquiry proceedings and he agreed with the view of some officer described as the D. G. M. (P) who apparently recorded a note in the meantime that the evidence was incomplete, tie therefore sent the case back to the Enquiry Committee for further consideration after recording the evidence of some more witnesses and also further examining an Electrical Chargeman whose examination appeared to be Incomplete.
4. The Enquiry Committee held further session on the 18th of April 1957 at which more evidence was taken, and by their report (annexure C to the writ petition) dated the 22nd of April 1957 they recorded their conclusion that Having once again considered and assessed the evidence for and against Narinjan Singh they did not find any material which would warrant modification of their original findings.
5. By his order dated the 25th of May, 1957 the General Manager, alter discussion at length the two reports of the Enquiry Committee, expressed the opinion that the first charge was also established against Narinjan Singh and ordered the issue of a nolice to him la show cause why he should not be removed from service in respect of the findings on both the charges. After Narinjan Singhs reply to the show cause notice had been considered the order was passed on the 20th of August, 1957 removing him from service. The dismissal of his appeal by the Railway Board was conveyed to him in a letter dated the 12th of February, 1958.
6. In accepting Narinjan Singhs writ petition and setting aside the orders removing him from service the learned Single Judge has found in the petitioners favour on both the charges against him, holding that the finding of the General Manager against him, on the first charge violated the principles of natural justice, and that the instructions which the petitioner was alleged to have contravened by addressing meetings in railway premises without permission of the authorities were themselves a cont
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
