CHAIRMAN, RAILWAY BOARD Vs. T RATNAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioners, we are of the opinion that by reason of the impugned order in this writ petition, the petitioners cannot be said to have been prejudiced particularly when the same had been passed basing on the departmental instructions dated 11-11-1998 issued by the Department of Personnel & Training.

(2.) Mr.Murthy, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, however, submits that the Union Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'UPSC' for the sake of brevity) has to be consulted before taking any action against the respondent as per the provisions under Art. 320 of the Constitution of India. It appears that the UPSC had already been consulted and the Commission opined that since the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the respondent are quasi-judicial in nature, it has to go through each and every document taken on record before tendering its advice, and thus by reason of its letter dated 12-3-2001 the Commission returned the case records with a request that a fresh self-contained reference with complete case records, including the documents/information mentioned therein be re-submitted to it. It is expected that the request of the UPSC has already been complied with. If the same had not been complied with, it should be complied with forthwith and the order of the learned Tribunal should also be brought to the notice of the Commission so as to enable it to apply its mind for rendering its opinion. Having regard to the fact that the time granted by the learned Tribunal in the impugned order passed in M.A.No.218 of 2001 in O.A.No.1913 of 2000 has already expired and this writ petition has been filed only on 4-6-2001, the petitioners would be at liberty to approach the learned Tribunal for extension of time granted to the Railway Board for passing the final order against the respondent.

(3.) With the aforementioned observations, the writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs.