ALEXANDER PAL SINGH Vs. DIVISIONAL OPERATING SUPERINTENDENT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Notice in the special leave petition was confined to grounds Nos. 7 and 8. Special leave granted. Arguments heard.

(2.) Mr Kacker, learned counsel for the appellant does not press ground No. 7 but confines his submission to ground No. 8 relating to the quantum of punishment. He submits that the appellant at thevery threshold of his life has been visited with the major punishment of removal from service for no act of misconduct involving moral turpitude but for his remissness or failure in not reporting to the Railway Hospital and obtaining the requisite medical certificate from the Railway Doctor during his period of sickness from 1/02/198 2/06/1982. Mr Vikram Mahajan, learned counsel appearing for the respondents leaves the question of punishment to the court.

(3.) This is not a case where the appellant has been found guilty of any act involving moral turpitude but the appellant has been punished for his negligence amounting to misconduct in not reporting to the Railway Hospital for treatment. While we cannot absolve the appellant for not reporting sick at the Railway Hospital but undergoing treatment of private doctors according to whose certificate he was suffering from typhoid and hepatitis, we think the ends of justice will be served by imposing a lesser punishment, namely, withholding of two increments with cumulative effect for a period of three years and in consequences loss of seniority.