(Reserved on 05.01.2026)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL JABALPUR BENCH (Circuit Sitting at Bilaspur)

This the 09^th day of January, 2026 HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE MRS. MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Original Application No. 832 of 2019 Tony D’Souza, S/o Late J. D’Souza, aged about 55 years, presently working as Khalasi/Helper/SSE/SIG-1/BSP/South East Central Railway, R/o Qtr No. 843/A, Construction Colony, Tarbahar, Distt – Bilaspur (CG) -

495004. …….Applicant V E R S U S Union of India through the General Manager, 5^th Floor, New G.M. Building, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh-

1.

495004.

Principal Chief Personnel Officer, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh- 495004.

2.

Additional Divisional Railway Manager, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh- 495004.

3.

Sr. Divisional Signal and Telecom Engineer, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh- 495004.

4.

Divisional Signal and Telecom Engineer, South East Central Railway, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh- 495004.

5.

Advocate for the applicant: Shri A.V. Shridhar Advocate for the respondents: Shri Bhupendra Pandey O R D E R By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM-

In the present original application, the applicant was served with a minor penalty charge sheet dated 04.05.2017 under Rule II of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules 1968 (Annexure A-2) for misconduct and gross negligence towards duty. The applicant vide his application dated 30.05.2017 requested to supply of documents in support of article of charge which was supplied to him vide letter dated 19.06.2017 (Annexure A-3). Then the applicant submitted his reply on 06.07.2017 (Annexure A-4) denying the allegations and prayed for withdrawal of the charge memorandum. Thereafter, the disciplinary authority vide order dated 18.07.2017 (Annexure A-5) imposed punishment of reduction of pay by two stages for a period of two years without cumulative effect. Against the aforesaid punishment, the applicant preferred an appeal dated 16.08.2017 (Annexure A-6) which was rejected by the Appellate Authority vide order dated 22.03.2019 (Annexure A-7). The applicant also filed revision petition which was also rejected by the Revisionary Authority vide order dated 19.08.2019 (Annexure A- 1).Hence, the applicant has filed the instant original application challenging the punishment order dated 18.07.2017, Appellate Order dated 22.03.2019 and Revisionary order dated 19.08.2019 on the ground that the action of the respondents is bad in law. The applicant has stated that he had categorically denied the allegations therefore, after denial of the charges by the applicant, the disciplinary authority was required to apply his mind whether the departmental inquiry as per Rule is necessary or not and the disciplinary authority was also required to record its reason to this effect.

2. The learned counsel for the applicant contended that while passing the order dated 18.07.2017 the disciplinary authority did not consider the points raised by the applicant in his reply and imposed the penalty of reduction of pay by two stages for a period of two years without cumulative effect by a cryptic and non-speaking order. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the order of the disciplinary authority is against the Rule 11 of Railway Servants (D&A) Rules according to which no penalty can be imposed without recording finding on each imputation of misconduct or misbehavior. In this regard, the learned counsel for the applicant has also referred to the Railway Board Order RBE No. 22/2009 dated 06.02.2009 and submitted that the impugned orders being unreasoned and non-speaking may be quashed with consequential benefits to be given to the applicant.

3. The respondents have contested the claim of the applicant. Learned counsel for the respondents contended that upon receipt of joint complaint from 32 staff against the applicant, he was served with a Memorandum of charge to which the