SOUTH EAST CENTRAL RAILWAY Vs. RAJIV NAGARIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This writ petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India is filed by the South East Central Railways challenging Annexure-P/1, order, dated 11.03.2016, issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench on an Original Application filed by the Respondent herein.

(2.) We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel for the Respondent.

(3.) Respondent joined duty in the Railways on 22.08.1997 before which he was subjected to medical examination by the Senior DMO of the Railways. Later, while the respondent was serving the Railways as Section Engineer (TRS), he was subjected to second medical examination on 17.01.2000 and thereupon by a Medical Board. Consequently, on 17.01.2001 the establishment served a charge sheet on the respondent alleging that he had committed serious misconduct by manipulating the colour blindness test at the time of recruitment and that was detected in the later examination of the Medical Board held of 17.01.2000. The Disciplinary Authority concluded the disciplinary proceedings against the delinquent and imposed the punishment of removal of the respondent from service. The institutional Appellate Authority dismissed the respondent's appeal on 31.12.2003. A revision petition filed by him on 02.03.2004 was dismissed on 19.10.2004. That was carried by the respondent to the Central Administrative Tribunal by instituting O.A. No. 58/2004. The Tribunal decided that Original Application holding that the disciplinary proceedings against the delinquent was a situation of no evidence and the testimony of Dr. Juneja, who was the Senior DMO was itself testimony to show that there was no material which could be held to conclude that the delinquent had suppressed the material facts or was instrumental in manipulating records or for that matter, had obtained medical certificate by suppressing materials from the Medical Officer. Resultantly, the Tribunal held that the disciplinary proceeding was unsustainable and resultantly quashed the Disciplinary Authority's order and consequently the appellate and the revisional authorities order's of the establishment. After setting aside the disciplinary proceeding and the decisions, the Tribunal directed the respondents (Establishment) to consider the case of the delinquent in accordance with section 47 of the Persons With Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection Of Rights And Full Participation) Act, 1995 (hereinafter referred to as 'PWD Act'). That was to be carried out within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the Tribunal's order. Dissatisfied by that decision, the establishment filed Writ Petition No. 6222 of 2005 before this Court. After elaborate consideration of the relevant facts and factors and also detailing the quality of jurisdictional concept under Article 227 of the Constitution of India, this Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the Establishment. That was carried to the Hon'ble Supreme Court through an unsuccessful Special Leave Petition which appears to have been dismissed at threshold.