The revising authority retains the power to enhance penalties irrespective of previous disciplinary decisions, provided procedural guidelines are followed.

ORDER 

Ms. Urmita Datta (Sen), Judicial Member:

The applicant has filed the instant Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 praying for the following relief:-

“a) Show cause notice No. SER/P- HQ/DAR/410/2/ACD/14 dated 16.10.2015 issued by the General Manager, the Revising Authority cannot be sustained in the eye of law and therefore the same may be quashed.”

2. The admitted facts that arise from pleadings are as under:-

The applicant, while working as a Sr. Section Engineer /OHE/BKSC, South Eastern Railway, was served with a major penalty charge sheet for alleged loss to the tune of Rs. 40,205/- to the Railways for shortage of 218 Mts. of copper catenary wire. It was further alleged that he is responsible for keeping excess materials with him. In reply to such chargesheet, the applicant in his reply claimed that the charges leveled against him suffers from certain discrepancies and had prayed for production of certain documents as also presence of defence witness. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority supplied him RUD No. 3, 4 & 5 but the clarification statement of Shri A.K. Majhi was not supplied. The applicant preferred a representation on 17.08.2009 praying for production of document. However, he was informed by the Disciplinary Authority that the documents mentioned in the representation are not relied upon documents. Enquiry was conducted. The applicant participated in the enquiry and thereafter an enquiry report was served upon him and he was asked to prefer a representation against the same. The applicant duly preferred a representation denying the charges. Thereafter the Disciplinary Authority imposed a punishment of reduction of pay to a lower stage from Rs. 24,840/- to Rs. 24,110/- i.e. one stage below in the scale of pay of Rs. 9300-34800/- for a period of four years.

The applicant preferred an appeal on 06.02.2011 stating that the Order cannot be sustained since the enquiry proceeding was vitiated due to certain irregularities. The Appellate Authority after considering the appeal imposed a punishment of ‘Censure’ vide Office Order dated 25.05.2011.

Further, the applicant being aggrieved with Office Order dated 08.08.2012 issued by the Chief Electrical Engineer, Revisionary Authority filed an O.A. being O.A. No. 882 of 2012 before this Tribunal which was disposed of vide Order dated 25.07.2014 quashing the Order passed by the Revisional Authority.

Thereafter, the General Manager, S.E. Railway, Garden Reach issued a show cause notice dated 27.12.2014 to the applicant stating that in terms of this Tribunal’s Order dated 25.07.2014 the earlier show cause notice dated 08.08.2012 was cancelled without prejudice due to a technical flaw in terms of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968.

The applicant challenges the show-cause notice on the ground that this Tribunal did not grant liberty to the respondent authorities to issue a fresh show cause notice on the self-same ground and the Authority concerned cannot be permitted to say that show cause notice dated 08.08.2012 stands cancelled without prejudice due to technical flaw in terms of RS(DA) Rules, 1968 and the General Manager, S.E. Railway without obtaining reply to the show cause notice had come to a conclusion that the applicant is guilty of the charges. The Revising Authority has failed to disclose any reason as to why he differs from the observation of the Appellate Authority and the Revising Authority cannot issue any show-cause notice on the basis of the findings of the Disciplinary Authority since the order of the Disciplinary Authority stands merged with the orders of the Appellate Authority and the Order dated 27.12.2014 is only a replica of the earlier Order dated 08.08.2012 which was passed by the Revisionary Autho