VINITA SARVESH KUMAR SHUKLA Vs. DIVISIONAL SECURITY COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the Petitioner.

(2.) The Petitioner has challenged the orders dtd. 11/3/2021 and 19/4/2021 passed by the Revisional Authority under the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987. The Petitioner joined the services of the Respondent - Railways in the year 1998 as a Lady Constable. Thereafter, she was permitted to the post of Assistant Sub Inspector and thereafter, as Sub Inspector in the year 2017. An incident took place in the area where the Petitioner was on duty whereby there was a spark and smoke from the gas pipe while carrying out the work. The Respondent - Railway Authorities, the employer were of the opinion that the Petitioner had failed in her duty and made an attempt to threaten the contractor.

(3.) Accordingly, charge-sheet was served on the Petitioner on 17/12/2019 under Sec. 9(i)(ii) of the Railway Protection Force Act, 1957 read with Rule 153 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 and the disciplinary enquiry was held. The Petitioner was given an opportunity and the Respondent imposed punishment of compulsory retirement. The Petitioner thereafter filed the revision under Rule 219 of the Railway Police Force Rules.