JAGDEVSINGH B Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mr. D.M. Thakkar appearing on behalf of Appellant - Jagdevsingh B.

(2.) It is necessary to note that record and proceedings has been called for by this Court, but, while perusing entire record, no notice has been issued by this Court to Respondents though matter remained pending at admission stage for about more than 14 years. Appeal was preferred on 14th December, 1994, but, it has been registered in the year 1997. It is also necessary to note that trial Court has decided Regular Civil Suit No. 79 of 1987 on 11th October, 1989 and lower appellate Court - District Judge, Rajkot has decided Regular Civil Appeal No. 136 of 1989 on 31st August, 1994. The order of termination Ex.22 before trial Court is dated 18th January, 1987. Therefore, in all, matter has taken 23 years to attain finality.

(3.) The brief facts of present second appeal are that Appellant Jagdevsingh was appointed as Rakshak in Railway Protection Force on probation for a period of two years on 18th January, 1985. During course of probation period, certain allegations were made against him and ultimately, notice was issued to him on 13th January, 1987 stating that his performance was not found satisfactory and therefore, he should submit his reply on allegations made against him. The Appellant has given explanation/reply on 16th January, 1987. The Respondent department has considered his explanation and ultimately, found that work of Appellant was not found satisfactory, therefore, his service was terminated by order dated 18th January, 1987 vide Ex.22 during probationary period. The main consideration for passing order of termination against present Appellant during period of probation of two years is that Appellant used to remain absent without any intimation or without getting his leave sanctioned frequently. He was informed that he was seen with anti-social elements and he was also required to mend his conduct & work. Despite above position and above warning, there was no improvement in his work and behaviour. The Appellant was also not attending duty in time. He was also found sleeping during office hours. He was also found absent from duty when checking was made. Once he was found getting down from first class compartment of railway on 27th October, 1986. There he was found in company of his friend showing that they were all travelling unauthorisedly in first class compartment of railway. The Appellant also left headquarter without any permission of concerned authority. The Appellant once misbehaved with another staff member on 16th November, 1986, then, he was required to attend extra drill on 17th December, 1986. Yet, there also he attended late by about two hours. Appellant was found threatening to ASI Shri Singh on 3rd January, 1987 and also constable Shri S.D. Mishra. In view of above allegations made against Appellant and it was considered by department and also keeping in mind facts alleged against Appellant, department found that Appellant was not fit to be continued in service and therefore, his service was terminated. In reply submitted by Appellant on 16th January, 1987, Appellant had merely denied all allegations made against him and no positive defence has been made out by Appellant. Main ground for challenging said order is as under: