Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 382

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
R.N. Singh, Judicial Member, Rajinder Kashyap, Administrative Member
Ajay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. No.3452 of 2025

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Yogesh Sharma
For the Respondents: Shri Ashish Singh

Judicial review in disciplinary matters limited to natural justice, procedure, evidence existence; pay fixation on reduction to lower post must follow DoP&T OM notional methodology, not minimum scale.

Headnote:(A) Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 - Rule 9 (Part IV, 9(21), 9(22), 9(25)(i)) - CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 - Rule 11(vi), Rule 14(18) - DoP&T OM dated 06.02.2014 - Disciplinary proceedings - Scope of judicial review - Tribunal cannot re-appreciate evidence or adequacy/reliability thereof unless findings based on no evidence, perverse, or violative of natural justice - Charged official admitted satisfaction with inquiry findings - Penalty of reduction to lower post upheld as proportionate - Pay fixation on reduction must follow OM methodology of notional pay in lower grade as if continued therein, with increments, not minimum of lower scale absent specific directions under FR 28. (Paras 7, 7.1-7.4, 10-14, 15-15.5)

(B) Disciplinary proceedings - Procedure - Compliance with natural justice mandatory - Supply of documents, cross-examination, general examination under Rule 9(21) - Non-reliance on unlisted/supplied documents or premature closure vitiates enquiry - However, where full opportunity afforded and no prejudice shown, proceedings sustainable. (Paras 10, 13)

(C) Penalty imposition - Reduction in rank/pay - Appellate modification from dismissal to time-bound reduction with restoration of post/pay/seniority - Implementation order fixing pay at minimum of lower post quashed for non-conformity with OM illustration requiring step-down to notional stage in lower grade. (Paras 15, 17)

Facts of the case:
Applicant, working as Chief Office Superintendent, charged with maintaining dual attendance registers, converting leaves/sick periods to present, and failing to update leave records with intent to mislead department, violating Railway Service Conduct Rules, 1966. Inquiry found charges proved; dismissal imposed, modified on appeal to reduction to Office Superintendent (GP 4200, Level-6) for three years with restoration. Implementation fixed pay at minimum of lower post, contested as contrary to DoP&T OM.

Findings of Court:
Inquiry and appellate penalty orders upheld; penalty compliance order dated 22.08.2024 quashed; directions issued for pay refixation per DoP&T OM dated 06.02.2014 with arrears, allowances, GPF interest within six weeks.

Issues: (i) Competence and natural justice compliance in inquiry; (ii) Reliance on unlisted documents; (iii) Evidence sufficiency; (iv) Appellate findings exceeding charges; (v) Pay fixation legality post-reduction. (Para 8)

Ratio Decidendi: Judicial review limited to process fairness, natural justice, some evidence existence; no re-appreciation of facts - findings sustainable where charged official accepts inquiry report and procedure followed; pay on reduction regulated by OM notional fixation, not arbitrary minimum placement. (Paras 7-9, 15.1-15.5)

Result: OA partly allowed.

Table of Content
1. applicant's service history and disciplinary proceedings summary (Para 1 , 2)
2. procedural defects and absence of dishonest intent in enquiry (Para 4)
3. enquiry followed rules; applicant admitted findings (Para 5)
4. limited judicial review in departmental proceedings (Para 6 , 7)
5. enquiry valid; no procedural or evidential flaws (Para 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14)
6. pay fixation on reduction must follow dop&t om 2014 (Para 15)
7. penalty proportionate; quash incorrect pay order (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19)

O R D E R

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A):

By filing the instant OA under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, the applicant is seeking the following reliefs:

"(i) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order of quashing the impugned penalty order dated 15.05.2024 (Annex.A/I), Appellate Authority order dated 31.07.2024 (Annex.A/2), Charge Sheet dated 27.10.2023 (Annex.A/4), Inquiry Officer report dated 23.03.2024 (communicated vide letter dated 01.04.2024) (Annex.A/5), declaring to the effect that the same are illegal, arbitrary and against the rules and consequently, pass an order directing the respondents to grant all the consequential benefits to the applicant including restoration of pay and post with arrears of difference of pay and allowance.

(ii) That in case of not granted the above prayed relief (i) for any reasons, the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order of quashing the Penalty compliance order dated 22.08.2024 (Annex.A/3) and pass an order directing the respondents to fix the pay of the applicant as per the Govt. of India OM dated 5.2.2014 with all the consequential benefits including arrears of difference of pay and allowances with interest.

(iii) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicant along with the costs of litigation."

FACTS IN BRIEF AS STATED BY THE APPLICANT

2. The applicant was initially appointed in the Railway Department to the post of Goods Guard w.e.f. 02.01.2003 through the Railway Recruitment Board. In the year 2005, the applicant was medically de- categorised from the post of Goods Guard and was thereafter absorbed in the cadre of Office Superintendent in the year 2008. Subsequently, he was promoted to the post of Chief Office Superintendent.

2.1 While working as Chief Office Superintendent, a major penalty charge sheet dated 27.10.2023 was issued to the applicant and the statement of article of charges levelled against the applicant, at page 32 of the paperbook, reads as under:-

"Statement of article of charges for misconduct on the basis of which D&AR action is to be taken against Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma, COS/GZB.

The said Sh. Ajay Kumar Sharma/COS/GZB, is held responsible for maintaining two attendance registers for marking attendance and leave/RMC (Sick) in original register and converting availed leaves & sick period for himself and also for their staff as present in the duplicate (new) register simultaneously from January 2023 and also for not updating the leave record with intention to mislead the department.

This shows the fraud intention to secure unfair and unlawful gain and not maintaining absolute integrity towards Railways and lack of devotion to duty, which is unbecoming of a Railway servant. Thus, he violated Para 3.1 (i), (ii) & (iii) of Railway Service Conduct Rules, 1966."

2.2 The applicant submitted a detailed representation dated 20.11.2023 (Annexure A/6). Although the said representation of the applicant was in Hindi Language, however, the translated copy of the said representation at pages 36 and 37 of the paperbook, and the same reads as under:

"Representation regarding Form No.05-84TM/IR/ D&AR/90/OPTG/2023 dated 27.10.2023 Senior Divisional Planning Manager/S./New Delhi Regarding the above mentioned standard Form No. 05, it is the representation and clarification that the attendance register of COS/GZB office was lost for the first time in th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 382

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALR.N. Singh, Judicial Member, Rajinder Kashyap, Administrative MemberAjay Kumar – AppellantVersusUnion of India – RespondentO.A. No.3452 of 2025

Judicial review in disciplinary matters limited to natural justice, procedure, evidence existence; pay fixation on reduction to lower post must follow DoP&T OM notional methodology, not minimum scale.

Cases Referred (10)

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
R.N. Singh, Judicial Member, Rajinder Kashyap, Administrative Member
Ajay Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
O.A. No.3452 of 2025