Back
2017 Supreme(All) 1222
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
(Lucknow Bench)
SUDHIR AGARWAL AND RAVINDRA NATH MISHRA-II, JJ.
M.P. RAWAT - Petitioner
Versus
UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS - Respondents
(Civil Misc. Writ Petition (S/B) Nos. 1259 of 2010 and 67 of 2009, decided on 1st November, 2017)
Counsel :
Subodh Kumar Verma and Abdul Moin for the Petitioner; Manik Sinha, Anita Srivastava, N.K. Agarwal, Navneet Kumar Agarwal and Pratul Kumar Srivastava for the Respondents.
Headnote:Railway Service (Conduct) Rules, 1966—Rule No. 3.1(I), (II) and (III), 9—Indian Railway Vigilance Manual (IRVM)—Paras 704 and 705—Misconduct—Removal—Reinstatement without backwages—Challenge against—Petitioner-employee a Travelling Ticket Examiner in Railway—Allegedly he overcharged a decoy passenger by Rs. 11 for allotment of one berth in Sleeper Class—Rule 9(21) of 1968 Rules is imperative and Railway servant must get an opportunity to explain circumstances appearing against him—If from evidence on record and proceedings conducted by Inquiry Officer, it cannot be found that there is any infraction of the procedure giving adequate opportunity of defence to delinquent employee and evidence is sufficient to prove the guilt, then mere non-observance of Paras 704 and 705 of IRVM would not be sufficient to vitiate the proceedings—Inquiry Officer in the instant case, on one hand has found that Tribunal rightly set aside the orders of punishment—When an employee is not allowed to work due to fault of State authorities, such person is entitled for salary for the period he has not been allowed to work—Impugned judgment of Tribunal to extent it has denied back wages to appellant set aside—Directions issued. [Paras 16 to 44]
Result; Order Accordingly.
Hon’ble Sudhir Agarwal, J.—Heard Sri Abdul Moin, Advocate, for petitioner and Sri Asit Kumar Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pratul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, for respondents in Writ Petition (SB) No. 1259 of 2010 (hereinafter referred to as “Employee’s Writ Petition”); and, Sri Asit Kumar Chaturvedi, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Pratul Kumar Srivastava, Advocate, for petitioners and Sri Abdul Moin, Advocate, for respondents in Writ Petition (SB) No. 67 of 2009 (hereinafter referred to as “Employer’s Writ Petition”).
2. The Writ Petition (SB) No. 1259 of 2010 (Employee’s Writ Petition) under Article 226 of Constitution has come up against judgment and order dated 5.9.2008 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as “Tribunal”) in Original Application (hereinafter referred to as ‘’O.A.’) No. 40 of 2004 whereby Tribunal has allowed O.A. partly and setting aside punishment order of removal dated 30.9.2002, appellate order dated 9.6.2003 and revisional order dated 18.12.2003, it has directed respondents to reinstate petitioner in service with all consequential benefits except back wages. Petitioner, therefore, has challenged the aforesaid order only to the extent back wages have been denied to him.
3. Writ Petition (SB) No. 67 of 2009 (Employer’s Writ Petition) is also directed against the same judgment and order dated 5.9.2008 and here employer-Union of India through General Manager, Central Railways, Bombay (hereinafter referred to as “Railway”) has come up challenging the aforesaid judgment to the extent punishment, appellate and revisional orders have been set aside.
4. Brief facts giving rise to these writ petitions are as under.
5. Applicant-employee, M.P. Rawat, was appointed on 16.1.1995 as Travelling Ticket Examiner (hereinafter referred to as “TTE”) in Railway and posted at Bhusaval. On 15.9.2001, Applicant-employee was assigned duty in Sleeper Coach-S2, S3 and S4 in Train No. 5218 UP running from Muzaffarpur to Kurla Terminal between Itarsi to Bhusaval Stations. A vigilance inspection was carried out by putting on decoy passengers. One of such decoy passenger was issued a reservation ticket for Rs. 69/- whereagainst he paid a note of Rs. 100/- but Applicant-employee returned only Rs. 20/- and pocketed Rs. 11/-. Vigilance Team conducted physical search of person of Applicant-employee and found no discrepancy in private cash declared by Applicant-employee and amount was recovered from his possession. A charge-sheet dated 13.12.2001 was issued to Applicant-employee containing a single charge that he overcharged a decoy passenger by Rs. 11/- for allotment of one berth in Sleeper class having Ticket No. 57314 IInd M/Express Ex. Khandwa to Nasik Road by Train No. 4218 up and that is how applicant-employee failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner unbecoming of a Railway Servant and contravened provisions of Rule 3.1 (I) (II) and (III) of Railway Service (Conduct) Rules, 1966 (hereinafter referred to as “Conduct Rules, 1966”). The “statement of imputation of misconduct” in Annexure-2 to the charge-sheet reads as under:
“On the basis of source information that sleeper TTE working in sleeper class are indulging in malpractices of overcharging the passenger while allotting the berth in sleeper class. A decoy check by a vigilance team consisting of S/Shri V.N. Shukla CVT(T), Sri G.D. Pandey, CVT(T) are planed and it was also decided. . the services of Shri S.R. Yadav, RPF as decoy passenger and Shri M.K. Gautam as an independent witness. A test check memo No. 1 duly signed by them was drawn at PF No. 1 and 2 of KNW on 15/9/2001 at 18.10 hrs. The decoy passenger was handed over a IInd M/Exp. Tkt. No. 57314 Ex. KNW to NKRD and a GC Note of Rs. 100/- bearing No. 1KC191193 and change Rs. 3/- for getting the reservation after producing above said tkt. to the sleeper TTE and pay the dues demanded by the sleeper
