A PALANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA UOI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, namely A. Palani, it is said, had been appointed as Rakshak in Railway Protection Force. He was stated to be performing the duty from 21. 30 hours to 06. 00 hours on July 15/16, 1982 at Villivakkam railway yard along with another Rakshak by name Krishnamurthy. He, along with the said Rakshak Krishnamurthy, was stated to have committed theft of two small wooden folding dining tables, two cushion pillows covered with brown colour rexine, two mirrors and seventeen numbers of small rolls of copper tubes from AC Coach No. SR 2685 found stationed there by using a false key for opening the said coach. For the said act of theft, charges, it is said, had been framed against them and a disciplinary enquiry had been instituted by the appointment of an Enquiry Officer. After complying with the requisite formalities and procedure, the Enquiry Officer, on consideration of the materials available on record, found the petitioner guilty of the charges framed against him land submitted his findings to the disciplinary authority and the disciplinary authority, in turn, ordered his removal from service.

(2.) THE petitioner, aggrieved by the removal, it is said, preferred appeal before the competent authority, who, in turn, it is said, exonerated him of the charges and allowed the appeal by ordering his reinstatement in service. The petitioner, it is said, had been accordingly reinstated in service by Office Order No. 81/83 dated May 12, 1983. As respects reinstatement, the entry reflected in his service register, as produced today for perusal of court, is couched in the following terms:

(3.) THE respondents railways, without resorting to filing any revision under Rule 60 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1959 (for short 'the Rules') reopened the enquiry for the same cause of action on the same facts and framed a charge against him for his failure to prevent theft of railway materials on the night of July 15/16, 1982 while he was on duty along with Rakshak Krishnamurthy. The Enquiry Officer, on consideration of the relevant materials produced, found him guilty of the charge and the Disciplinary Authority, in his proceedings M/xp/227/5-84 dated December 30, 1984 ordered his removal from service.