SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition filed against the order of dismissal dated 6.3.1986 passed by the respondents as well as order passed on 28.5.1995 passed in appeal by the Deputy Inspector General of the Railway Protection Force. The petitioner was charged with running a diary consisting of 12 Buffalows and two cows without the prior approval of the Competent Authority of the Railways on the ground that such act was likely to embarrass him in the discharge of his official duties. The enquiry was conducted and the enquiry report dated 16.10.1985 framing the charge was placed before the appropriate authority. Pursuant to the enquiry report, the service of the petitioner was terminated.

(2.) Mr. Anil Gupta, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, has urged that the charge framed of running a diary does not fall and come within the ambit of Rule-16 (2) of the Railway Service and Conduct Rules (hereinafter called as "Rules"). Sub-rule (2) of Rule-16 of the Rules is as follows - "No Government servant shall make, or permit any member of his family or any person acting on his behalf to make, any investment which is likely to embarrass or influence him in the discharge of his official duties."

(3.) On the basis of aforesaid Rule, Mr. Gupta has argued that this Rule deals with investment, lending, borrowing and the investment, even if it is assumed that the dairy business was conducted by the wife of the petitioner it would not be an investment in terms of Rule-16. Mr. Gupta has argued that a specific provision has been incorporated under the Rules i.e. Rule-15, to deal with such kind of situation as is alleged by the petitioner. However, on merit he has denied that any investment has been made by the petitioner in the diary business. Rule-15 of the Rules is as follows:-