C.P.PADMANABHAN Vs. SOUTHERN RAILWAY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is aggrieved with the punishment imposed as per Exhibit P3, purportedly after conducting a domestic enquiry; and affirmed as per Exhibit P5. The petitioner was working as a Constable with the Railway Protection Force.

(2.) The facts leading to the complaint were that the petitioner, while on duty was seen occupying a berth and sleeping, which was allotted to one another person. When the person who had the reservation, along with his father got into the train and tried to keep the baggage, the petitioner is alleged to have created a fracas and threatened the passenger and the person accompanying him. On the reserved passenger seeking the berth reserved in his name, the petitioner is said to have misbehaved with the said passenger even after the train proceeded with its journey, till Kannur.

(3.) Specific charges were framed with respect to the incident of misbehaviour and un -authorised occupation of a reserved berth. The charge -sheet was issued, at Exhibit P1. A detailed enquiry was conducted, in which the complainant, the father of the passenger and the passenger were examined. There was no infirmity in the issuance of the show cause notice; the objections against which were considered and charges framed. There can be no procedural irregularity found,in the enquiry proceedings since the petitioner was given the list of documents and witnesses and permitted perusal of the documents relied on by the Department and also permitted cross -examination of the witnesses. The petitioner was also issued with the enquiry report and objections were called for before the punishment was imposed.