CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH JABALPUR Original Application No.200/00210/2017 Indore, this Wednesday, the 11^th day of February, 2026 HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE AKHIL KUMAR SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER HON’BLE SMT MALLIKA ARYA, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER Abhishek Kumar, S/o Late Satya Narayan Prasad, Aged about 37 years, R/o Q. No. 289/02, Subhash Railway Colony, South Civil Lines, Jabalpur (M.P)

-Applicant (By Advocate –Shri Akash Choudhury)

V e r s u s

1. Union of India, Through its General Manager, West Central Railway, Indira Market, Jabalpur - 482 001 (M.P)

2. Deleted

3. The Chief Vigilance Officer, West Central Railway, Jabalpur - 482 001 (M.P)

4. The Dy. Chief Vigilance Officer, West Central Railway, Jabalpur - 482

001 (M.P)

5. Additional Divisional Railway Manager, West Central Railway, Jabalpur - 482 001 (M.P)

6. The Sr. Divisional Commercial Manager, West Central Railway, Jabalpur - 482 001 (M.P)

7. The Divisional Commercial Manager, West Central Railway, Jabalpur -

482 001 (M.P) - Respondents (By Advocate –Shri N K Mishra)

O R D E R By Mallika Arya, AM:

Through this Original Application, the applicant is seeking quashment of the charge sheet dated 28.02.2011 (Annexure A/1), order passed by Disciplinary Authority dated 26.11.2012 (Annexure A/7) and the order passed by the Appellate Authority dated 21.09.2015 (Annexure A/11) with all consequential benefits. Further he has prayed that arrears of pay be paid along with suitable interest.

2. Briefly stating, the facts of the case are that a decoy check was conducted by the Vigilance team wherein the applicant is alleged to have taken an illegal gratification of Rs. 10 from a decoy passenger. He kept an amount of Rs. 68 as unaccounted cash in his Railway Cash and it seems that the amount of Rs. 10 was included in the same. Hence, the applicant has contravened the provisions of Rule 3.1(i) of Railway Services Conduct Rules, 1966. An inquiry was conducted in terms of the power vested under Rule 9 (2) of Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 and a major penalty was imposed upon the applicant by the Disiciplinary Authority (Annexure A/2). The Inquiry Officer submitted his report dated 27.09.2012 (Annexure A/4) vide letter dated 08.10.2012 (Annexure A/5). The applicant preferred a representation against the Inquiry Officer’s report before Respondent No. 7 on 22.10.2012 (Annexure A/6). With a predetermined mind, Respondent No. 7 vide order dated 26.11.2012 (Annexure A/7) imposed a harsh punishment of reduction from the stage of Rs. 5,200 - 20,200 + grade pay of Rs. 2,800/- to the initial stage for 15 years with cumulative effect and further directed that his pay at the particular time would be reduced from the basic pay of Rs. 12,750/- to 11,360/-. Thereafter the applicant preferred an appeal dated 03.01.2013 (Annexure A/8) before the Respondent No. 6. The Appellate Authority (Respondent No. 6) took a compassionate view and reduced the currency of punishment from 15 years to 3 years vide order dated 21.09.2015 (Annexure A/11). Thereafter, applicant has preferred a Revision Petition against the order dated 21.09.2015. The Revisionary Authority vide order dated 31.03.2016 (Annexure A/14) concluded the matter by affirming the punishment imposed by the Appellate Authority. The applicant has contended that the principles of fair play and natural justice have been flouted. The applicant has also contended that the entire disciplinary proceedings have been conducted on the basis of the dictates of the vigilance wing in the Respondent department.

3. The respondents have filed their reply wherein it has been stated that a complaint was received that the ‘on-duty’ Reservation Clerk of Pachamadhi reservation office was taking illegal gratification from passengers while giving Tatkal Reservation, in the vigilance branch. A decoy check was conducted at Pachmadhi Reservation Office on 15.12.2010 comprising of a six member team in which 04 were Vigilance Inspectors, 01 was a decoy passen