UNION OF INDIA Vs. REGISTRAR CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS common order will dispose of the above five writ petitions as they have in common the fact-situation and the issues arising therefrom. In all these writ petitions, the challenge is to the order dated 5-6-2006 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (in short 'the Tribunal'). While W.P.Nos.28392 to 28394 of 2006 were filed by the three original applicants, W.P.Nos.25606 and 25607 of 2006 were filed by the Railways.

(2.) ON a perusal of the materials placed on record and upon hearing the learned senior counsel for both, it comes to be known that the petitioners in W.P. Nos.28392 to 28394 of 2006 and respondents in W.P.Nos.25606 and 25607 of 2006 (hereinafter referred to as 'the delinquent-employees') were the employees of the Railways. Alleging that on 30-1-2004, they all, with premeditated mind, gathered on the platform of the Tiruchy Railway Junction, hurled verbal abuses against a retired Railway officer, who was leaving Trichy by train along with his family members, assaulted and threatened him and also threatened and intimidated the other railway officers who were there to see-off the retired officer and thereby created panic, terror and tension in the minds of not only the retired officer and his family members and the other railway officers, but also the other passengers and the general public, an order of dismissal was passed on 30-1-2004. A complaint was also lodged with the Railway Police, resulting in a criminal case. It was pointed out in the order of dismissal that it would not be practicable to hold an enquiry before directing dismissal. The departmental appeals filed by the delinquent-employees were rejected. The delinquent-employees were, however, acquitted in the criminal case. ON the revision/representation filed by the delinquent-employees, the revisional authority set aside the penalty of dismissal from service in respect of three delinquent-employees and ordered their reinstatement with reduction in rank to the lower post, but summarily rejected the revision/representation filed by the other two delinquent employees. Challenging the order of the revisional authority, original applications were filed before the Tribunal. The Tribunal, by the common order, quashed the orders passed by the revisional authority and directed the restoration of the original applicants to their original position and directed the Railways to regulate the period of their dismissal from 31-1-2004 to the date of reinstatement strictly in accordance with law. Aggrieved, while the Department has filed W.P.Nos.25606 and 25607 of 2006 challenging the order of reinstatement of two employees, three employees, who were reduced in rank, have filed W.P.Nos.28392 to 28394 of 2006. Since a common issue is involved, all these writ petitions are taken up for common disposal.

(3.) THE learned senior counsel appearing for the delinquent-employees submitted that the action of the third respondent in resorting to Rule 14(ii) of the Railway Servants (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules (in short 'the Rules') for dispensing with the enquiry against the delinquent-employees and passing the order of dismissal on the very same day is arbitrary, illegal and unjust and violative of the principles of natural justice; that there was no compelling reasons shown in writing by the third respondent for invoking the extraordinary provisions of Rule 14(ii) of the Rules; that the undue haste shown by the third respondent in resorting to Rule 14(ii) of the Rules and passing the dismissal orders would only exhibit the non-application of mind by the third respondent and the pre-determined mind of the authorities to victimise the employees concerned.