UNION OF INDIA AND ANOTHER Vs. BABBAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These two second appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment as the question which falls for determination hrthe two appeals is identical. The second appeals are directed against concurrent decrees passed by the courts below by which two suits filed by Babban Singh and Safrullah (the respondent No. 3 in each of the two appeals) for a declaration that their removal from the Railway Protection Force as Head Rakshaks was null and void, being violative of Article 311 of the Constitution of India, were decreed.

(2.) The facts found by the two courts below are that both the aforesaid plaintiffs were appointed initially as Rakshaks by the Assistant Security Officer, Eastern Railway, Dinapur. Subsequently, they were both promoted to the rank of Head Rakshaks. At the relevant time, these plaintiffs were posted as a Head Rakshaks at Mughalsarai.

(3.) While these plaintiffs were on duty in the Down Proceeding Yard at Mughalsarai, some theft of bales of cloths was said to have been committed in a Railway wagon. Both the plaintiffs were charge-sheeted by the Assistant Security Officer for negligence of duty which resulted in the aforesaid theft. In pursuance of the said charge-sheet, an inquiry was conducted. Subsequently, the Security Officer, Eastern Railway, Mughalsarai issued a notice to both the plaintiffs to show cause why the penalty of removal be not imposed upon them. The plaintiffs submitted a reply which did not seem to satisfy the security officer, with the result that orders of removal were passed against each of the two plaintiffs. The plaintiffs filed appeals against these orders which were rejected by the Chief Security Officer, Eastern Railway, Calcutta. Thereupon, the plaintiffs filed the two suits which have given rise to these appeals.