SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 651

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Om Prakash, J, Mohan Pyare, A
Ravi Pratap Pandey – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through The General Manager, North Eastern Railway – Respondent
Original Application No.1129 of 2010



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Ravi Sharma
For the Respondents: Shri Ashish Srivastava

Disciplinary proceedings must follow statutory procedures, and penalties can be upheld unless found arbitrary or in violation of principles of natural justice.

Headnote:(A) Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 - Section 19 - Disciplinary Proceedings - The Tribunal found that the penalty of reduction in rank imposed due to missing railway tickets was justified despite the applicant's claims of being on leave during the incident, emphasizing adherence to rules and principles of natural justice. The procedural conduct was deemed lawful, and the decision noted the importance of the inquiry's findings. The applicant failed to prove any irregularities in the disciplinary proceedings. (Paras 10, 12, 18, 22)

(B) Natural Justice - The disciplinary action was held to comply with the principles of fair process as the applicant was afforded opportunities to present his defense, and there was no procedural impropriety. The rejection of the review petition was aligned with established protocols. (Paras 12, 22)

(C) Burden of Proof - The applicant was unable to substantiate claims of error in the disciplinary process, as the inquiry's report supported the findings against him despite his objections. The established legal precedent holds that a mere error in judgment does not equate to misconduct. (Paras 10, 12)

Facts of the case:
The applicant faced disciplinary action for the loss of railway tickets while on duty, maintaining he reported their absence timely. He alleged that the charges were unfounded, and the authority lacked grounds for punishment. The inquiry found discrepancies in his accounting that questioned his integrity.

Findings of Court:
The Tribunal upheld the disciplinary action as lawful, confirming that the penalty was proportionate and based on sufficient evidence derived from the inquiry. The inquiry parameters and resultant actions were within the scope of legal authority.

Issues: The key issues included whether the penalty imposed was appropriate given the circumstances, and whether due process was followed in the disciplinary actions taken against the applicant.

Ratio Decidendi: The Tribunal reasoned that the inquiry met legal standards, and findings against the applicant were adequate to justify the imposed penalty, highlighting that a procedural error must be significant to warrant intervention in disciplinary matters.

Result: The application is dismissed.

Table of Content
1. factual basis for the disciplinary action. (Para 1 , 2 , 3)
2. details of the penalties and administrative actions taken. (Para 4 , 5)
3. arguments regarding the legality of charges and penalties. (Para 6 , 7)
4. disciplinary authorities' findings and contents of appeals. (Para 8 , 9)
5. judicial review standards and limitations on disciplinary actions. (Para 10 , 11)
6. role of the tribunal in evaluating disciplinary proceedings. (Para 12 , 13)
7. constitutional and statutory principles regarding disciplinary actions. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22)
8. final dismissal of the application. (Para 23)

ORDER

By Hon’ble Mr. Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Present Original Application has been filed under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act , 1985, seeking the following relief:

“8.1 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to set-aside/quash Penalty Order dated 25-05-2005 passed by the Divisional Commercial Manager, North Eastern Railway, Varanasi (Respondent No.4) imposed penalty of ‘Reduction in rank from pay scale Rs.4000-6000, basic pay Rs.4200/- to pay scale Rs.3200-4900 with basic pay Rs. 3200/- for four years permanently with cumulative effect” being passed by the incompetent authority in gross violation to the statutory rules and also in violation to the principles of natural justice as well.

8.2 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to set-aside/quash the Revisionary Order dated 01-10-2009 passed by the Additional Divisional Railway Manager, North Eastern Railway, Varanasi (Respondent No.2), upholding the penalty as imposed by the Disciplinary Authority vide order dated 25-05-2005 being in violation to the order of the Hon’ble CAT dated 27-07-2009 in O.A. No.317 of 2007 and in violation to the statutory rules and principles of natural justice as well.

8.3 The Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow all the consequential benefits to the Applicant in this matter.

8.4 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to allow cost in favour of the Applicant as he has been dragged again to this Hon’ble Tribunal on account of illegal action and illegal impugned orders as well in violation to the statutory rules and Hon’ble CAT orders as well.

8.5 That the Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass any other order or direction as may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”

2. The present Application is made against the Memorandum of Charges for Major Penalty (SF-5) issued to the applicant vide letter dated 14-01-2002 issued by the Divisional Commercial Manager, N.E.Railway, Varanasi, the Disciplinary Authority, Respondent No. 4; Penalty Order issued by the Divisional Commercial Manager, N.E.Railway, Varanasi, the Disciplinary Authority, Respondent No. 4, vide letter dated 25-05-2005 imposing penalty of "Reduction in rank from pay scale Rs. 4000-6000, basic pay Rs. 4200/- to pay scale Rs. 3200-4900 at basic pay Rs. 3200/- for four years permanently" and Revisionary Order issued vide letter dated 01-10-2009 by the Additional Divisional Railway Manager, N.E. Railway, Varanasi, the Revisionary Authority, Respondent No. 2, as passed in compliance with this Tribunal’s order dated 27-07-2009 in O.A. No. 317 of 2007 Ravi Pratap Pandey Vs. Union of India & others.

3. Brief facts of this case as narrated in the O.A. are that on 25-12-2000, when the applicant was performing duty on Booking Counter at Belthara Road Railway Station, a broken bundle of 18 Second Class Passenger Tickets and one bundle of 101 Second Class Passenger Tickets from Belthara Road to Deoria Sadar were found missing from the Tube (Tickets Almirah). The Applicant searched the missing bundles of Tickets and after his search when the Tickets could not be traced out, he immediately informed about the missing Tickets to the Coaching Superintendent, Belthara Road Railway Station on duty. The Coaching Superintendent first tried his best to search out the missing Tickets and when h

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top