SATYA VIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The main question which has been canvassed and falls for considerat'onin this petition is whether the orders of the Disciplinary Authority to the effect that it was not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry could be said to be valid in law.

(2.) This petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, has been filed by 52 petitioners, challenging the order of dismissal passed against the petitioners Nos. I to 4 and contemplated action of dismissal against petitioners Nos. 5 to 51. Petitioner No. 52 is the employees association. It is alleged in the petition that petitioners Nos. I to 4 were till recently employees of the Research & Analysis Wing (hereinafter referred to as the RAW) of the Government of India. The petitioners Nos. 5 to 51 are still employees of RAW and are under suspension. The RAW is an Intelligence Wing of the Government of India and is concerned in intelligence gathering and analysis of overseas affairs. A sister Organisation viz., the Intelligence Bureau were initially formed in 1904 but was reorganised and reinforced in 1948. Initially the Intelligence Bureau was concerned with domestic and inter-national affairs but since 1968 it is concerned only with domestic affairs. The RAW was a branch of Intelligence Bureau and is now a separate department since 1968 and is concerned with Inter-national affairs. For some time past, the employees of the Intelligence Bureau and the RAW had been seeking to ventilate their grievances regarding the terms of office, pay scales, recruitment, transfers and other general grievances. Realising the difficulties faced by the employees of the RAW, the Government of India set up Staff Councils and Apex Councils for each department separately. However, the Staff Councils and Apex Councils were not functioning as anticipated by the employees of the various departments and therefore the employees of each department separately decided to form their own associations so as to be able to effectively ventilate their grievances. The Government of India being aware of the desire of the employees of various Intelligence Wings functioning under it, was vehemently opposed to the formation of any association of the employees. Nevertheless", the employees of the Intelligence Bureau went ahead and formed an association which was subsequently registered as a society by the Registrar of Societies. By these developments, the employees of the RAW actively began to consider the formation and registration of an association for their benefit. Several steps were taken by the employees of the RAW towards this end. Meetings were organised and discussions took place regarding the aims and objections of the association and the office bearers etc. Finally the employees of the RAW formed an association on 14-2-1980 and the same was registered on 30-6-1980 by the Registrar of Societies, Delhi. This fact was inlimated to the respondents who thought it fit to thwart the effectiveness of the assocation for reasons best known to them. The employees of the RAW after the formation of the association elected office bearers of the association, in order to stall the activities of the association. The respondents took various steps in this direction by seeking to transfer the Vice-President of the RAW Employees Association. Ths association, however, sought to represent against some of the arbitrary actions of the Government. The main actions against which the association moved were that several members of the Ministrial Staff of the RAW Were asked to perform security duties, which had been happening for quite some time, but since the association was formed only some time back the employees were not able to take any sort of concerted action against the directions to the employees of the RAW to perform, security duties. The grievance of the employees was that the respondent should either give a special allowance to the employees performing security duty which was over arid above their usual duties or the employees be exempted from performing such duties. On 15-8-1980 the respondents were informed by the association that unless a decision was taken in this regard within the period of one month the employees would have no other alternative but to refrain from performing, the security duties. A day before the date when the notice period was to expire i.e. 14*9-1980, the Director of RAW called some representatives of the employees for discussions regarding the special allowance and or the exemption from special duty. In the said meeting the Director told the representatives of the employees that it was not possible for him to accede to the demands of the employees. Consequently w.e.f. 15-9-1980 the employees of the RAW decided to stop performing the special duty. The Director, however, assured the employees that he would look .into the grievances of the employees, but this assurance was only to delay the decisions and was meant to break the unity of the employees. Since nothing was done by the respondent in H this regard and also because the employees of the RAW had other outstanding grievances, the association decided to send a comprehensive Charter of Demands for the rodressal of their grievances.

(3.) The other grievance of the employees was that some times in February 1980 the various branches of the Department of RAW were being shifted to the new building being constructed for RAW Office at Lodhi Road. On or around 25-11-1980 during the process of shifting one Col. Baghchi, Assistant Director slapped one of the employees of fie RAW for damage caused to legs of the sofa being transferred to the new building. This imflamed all the other employees who were involved in the process of shifting. The matter was referred to the office bearers who met the Deputy Director on the same day and requested him that some action be taken in this regard. No action was either taken nor was any assurance given to the employees that action would be taken. Feeling aggrieved, the employees also met the Deputy assembled on 26-11-1980 at Lodhi Road and the representatives of the employees also met the Deputy Director and requested that Col. Bagchi be sent back to the parent Organisation. They requested the Deputy Director (Establishment) to take a decision within two days in this regard.