SHESH MANI DUBEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner who was a member of Railway Protection Force (R. P. F.) has challenged the order dated 2-9-1982 by which he was removed from service under Rule 47 (b) of the R. P. F. Rules, 1959 (in short 'the Rules').

(2.) REMOVAL from service is one of the major penalties specified in rule 41 of the Rules, which according to rule 44, cannot be inflicted "except after an enquiry held as far as may be in the manner" provided in the rule. But rule 47 which has an overriding effect provides for dispensation of the enquiry in certain circumstances and in the instant case the normal procedure of enquiry prescribed by rule 44 was dispensed with under rule 47 (b) of the Rules. The rule being relevant; for discussion is quoted as below :

(3.) THE learned counsel for the respondents contended before me that the petitioner has an alternative remedy by way of appeal under rule 52 of the Rules and therefore, the petition be dismissed on this ground alone. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, I do not feel pursuaded to dismiss the writ petition at this stage on the ground of alternative remedy THE petition was admitted in 1982 after exchange of counter and rejoinder affidavits and the Division Bench consisting of Hon. K. N. Singh, J. (as his Lordship then was) and Hon. K. M. Dayal, J. even though, as submitted by Sri Lalji Sinha himself,, the plea of alternative remedy was raised at that stage also. If the petitioner was not relegated to the alternative remedy of appeal at that stage it would not be proper to do so at the stage of final hearing which has reached after about nine years.