SAMAR NANDY CHOUDHURY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BEING aggrieved, by the judgment of Hon'ble Mr. Justice P. C. Borooah discharging; the Rule obtained by him against the Memorandum of charge sheet dated 2nd August, 1971 Issued by the Senior Divisional Mechanical Engineer (P), North Eastern frontier Railway, Katihar, the appellant has preferred this appeal

(2.) THE appellant at the relevant time was Fireman -B under the North Eastern frontier Railway Administration. In the year 1973 he was elected as the Secretary of the North Eastern Frontier Railway Co-operative Stores Ltd. , Malda. The Senior, Divisional Mechanical Engineer (P), North Eastern Frontier Railway, Katihar, had purported to issue the impugned charge-sheet in respect of certain alleged acts of misconduct committed by the petitioner as Secretary of the North Eastern Frontier Railway, Cooperative Stores Ltd. The petitioner has challenged the authority of the Senior divisional Mechanical Engineer (P), katihar to initiate a disciplinary enquiry and to serve charge-sheet upon him not in respect of any. act allegedly done by him in performing his duties as a railway servant but in respect "of alleged acts committed by him in the capacity of the Secretary of the said co-operative stores. The substance of the petitioner's case is that only under the provisions of the West Bengal Co-operative Societies Act an enquiry can be held in respect of acts allegedly done by him as the Secretary of the co-operative stores and the Railway Authorities cannot conduct any disciplinary enquiry against him in respect of the said allegations

(3.) IN our view, the learned Single judge has rightly discharged the Rule obtained by the appellant and the disciplinary enquiry and the charge sheet issued against the petitioner cannot be quashed in limine because the Railway authorities have jurisdiction in the matter. The appellant is a whole-time railway employee and he is subject to provisions of Rule 3 of the Railway Service conduct Rules, 1966 which, inter alia, requires that every railway servant shall at all times maintain absolute integrity He is also forbidden from doing anything which is unbecoming of a railway or government servant. The aforesaid provisions of the Conduct Rules are wide enough to include not only acts done by a railway servant In discharge of his duties but also acts done outside his employment. The respondents have relied upon the Railway Board Letter nos. E/55/r. G. 6/15 dated 26. 7. 55 and e- (D. A)-73-R. G.-6/23 dated 19. 6. 73 on , the subject of disciplinary action against the railway servants guilty of mismanaging or misappropriating the funds of Railway Co-operative Societies institutions, clubs etc. The Railway Board by their earlier letter dated 26th July, 1955 had" clarified doubt on the question whether disciplinary action can be taken against the Railway servants found guilty of charge outside their duties in connection with the affairs of institutions, like Railway Co-operative Societies Railway Institutes clubs and other similar bodies which are established and run by railway servants. The Railway Board had observed that it would be quite in order for Railway Administration to take appropriate disciplinary action against staff found guilty of the offence referred. The Railway Board by their subsequent letter' dated 19th June, 1973 dispelled the impression that no action could be taken against railway servants for charges of misappropriation or other irregularities amounting to Serious misconduct in discharge of their duties in connection the affairs of the institutions like the Railway Co-operative Societies etc until they had been found guilty by the can teen management or by the Registrar of Co-operative Societies. The Railway board laid down that in terms of the railway Servants (Discipline and Appeal)Rules, 1968. penalties may be imposed on a railway servant for good and sufficient reasons It was therefore not necessary that the railway servant should be found guilty of any offence by the management or the Registrar of the co-operative Societies before the action could be taken under the disciplinary rules. Further, whether there were good and sufficient reasons and whether, there was prima facie evidence are matters which would have to be considered appropriately by the Disciplinary Authority before any action was initiated under the Disciplinary Rules.