Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 15471
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Ranjana Shahi, Judicial Member, Lok Ranjan, Administrative Member
Hemant Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Application No.077/2024
Important Points
Subject
Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings
Act Referred
Code of Criminal Procedure: S.151, S.107
Railway Service (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968: R.9, R.18, R.25, R.7
Railway Servants Pass Rules, 1986
Railway Service (Conduct) Rules, 1966
Headnote
(B) Disciplinary Authority - Competence to issue charge-sheet - Authority must be under whose administrative control the delinquent employee works - Prescribed authorities as per rules are competent to initiate departmental action and impose penalties. (Paras 14, 21)
Facts of the case:
An employee challenged the penalty of reduction in pay scale imposed by the competent disciplinary authority. The employee faced charges for failing to inform administrative authorities regarding his detention following criminal complaints and for the unauthorized use of a travel concession pass to facilitate the journey of an unauthorized person. The employee contended procedural irregularities, lack of competence of the disciplinary authority, and that the charges were rooted in personal matrimonial disputes.
Findings of Court:
The Court held that the disciplinary authority was properly constituted as per ministerial schedules. Procedural fairness and adherence to principles of natural justice were observed throughout the inquiry. The factual findings regarding the misconduct were supported by evidence, and the legal basis for the penalty was sound. The Court rejected the assertion that personal affairs precluded disciplinary action when such conduct amounted to a violation of service and pass rules.
Issues: Whether the disciplinary authority was legally competent to initiate proceedings and whether the departmental inquiry suffered from procedural infirmities or illegality that warranted judicial interference.
Ratio Decidendi: Judicial review in disciplinary matters is confined to the decision-making process, not the correctness of the decision itself. Where an inquiry is conducted by a competent authority, follows natural justice principles, and is based on some evidence, the court shall not act as an appellate authority to re-appreciate facts or substitute findings.
Result: Original Application dismissed.
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Sunil Samadaria
For the Respondents: Arun Sharma
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of procedural history and factual matrix of the disciplinary case. (Para 1 , 2 , 3) |
| 2. applicant's challenges based on procedural impropriety, lack of competence, and evidentiary gaps. (Para 4 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. respondents' defense on the competence of the authority and the validity of departmental findings. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. scope of judicial review limited to procedural compliance, natural justice, and evidentiary sufficiency. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 5. evaluation of specific procedural allegations, including non-speaking orders and relevance of personal affairs to misconduct. (Para 15 , 16 , 17) |
| 6. findings on the compliance of inquiry procedures and the non-maintainability of challenging factual evidence in judicial review. (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. final ruling dismissing the o.a. due to lack of legal infirmity in the disciplinary process. (Para 22 , 23) |
ORDER
Per: Hon’ble Shri Lok Ranjan, Member (A)
The present Original Application had been filed by the Applicant against the order dated 12.05.2023 of the Additional Divisional Railway Manager (Operation) [A.D.R.M.(Op.)], Ajmer , i.e. the Respondent No.2, as the Disciplinary Authority (D.A.) – whereby major penalty of “reduction in pay scale by two stages for three years with future/cumulative effect” was imposed ; and also against the order dated 21.09.2023 of the Principal Chief Operation Manager (P.C.O.M.), N.W.R. Headquarters, Jaipur, i.e. the Respondent No.3,as the Appellate Authority (A.A.) – whereby the penalty imposed by the D.A. upon the Applicant was retained.
2. Based on the pleading of the parties, the relevant matrix of facts in the present case had emerged as follows, briefly. The Applicant had been appointedGoods Guard, laterdesignated as Train Manager (Goods), with the N.W.R. in 2018, as an ex serviceman recruited by the Railway Recruitment Board (R.R.B.), Ajmer. In 2020, he was promoted as Senior Train Manager (Goods). An F.I.R. No.120/2021 dated 10.04.2021 came to be filed against the Applicant at P.S. Railway Colony, Kota under Section-(341, 323 and 34) of the I.P.C. – alleging wrongful restraint and voluntarily causing hurt against his wife and his parents-in-law – and the Applicant was detained under Section-(151 and 107) of the Cr.P.C. at the said police station from 09:00 P.M. on 10.04.2021 to 04:00 P.M. on 11.04.2021. Later, another F.I.R. No.162 dated 14.06.2021 was lodged at P.S. Mahila Thana, Kota under Section-(498A and 406) of I.P.C. – alleging cruelty and criminal breach of trust by the Applicant. Further, the Applicant'swife, one Smt. Suman Kala, submitted a complaint/representation on 04.08.2021 to the Senior Divisional Commercial Operations Manager (S.D.C.M.O.) Ajmer – alleging ill-treatment and cruelty leading to filing of the aforesaid F.I.R.s ; and asking for payment of 50% of his salary towards her maintenance. Upon being asked vide letters dated 06.09.2021 and 14.09.2021 of the Office of the D.R.M., Ajmer to furnish his explanation regarding the said complaint/representation,the Applicant had provided the same vide his letter dated 05.10.2021. Later, the Office of D.R.M. Ajmer had further asked the Applicant vide letter dated 03.01.2022 to submit details about his detention and the status of the afore-said criminal cases – which were provided vide letter dated 18.01.2022.
3. Subsequently, another complaint was also lodged on 07.06.2022 by the said Smt. Suman Kala, alleging that the Applicant had misused the Railway Concession Pass issued for travel of his family members, specifically for herself as the Applicant’s wife – by making one Smt. Neeru Devi travel against the same during the journey from Ajmer to Amritsar boarding on 26.05.2022 and during the return journey from Amritsar to Ajmer reaching on 30.05.2022. Applicant’s statement in this regard was recorded initially on 10.06.2022 as part of a preliminary inquiry. A Memorandum of charge-sheet dated 03.08.2022 under Rule-9 of the Railway Service (Discipline
