UNION OF INDIA Vs. AMAR CHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Court is little surprised this appeal has been filed at all.

(2.) THE gravamen of the charge against the respondent Amar Chand as it stood on the record of the railway establishment was that while posted as a second fire man he shunted a railway engine in the absence of the driver. There was a departmental enquiry. The departmental enquiry went into the entire aspect of the fault or the lapses on which a charge stood against the respondent. After a full -fledged departmental enquiry the respondent was found not guilty. It is on record that completely oblivious to the merits of the enquiry, which had found him not guilty, the disciplinary authority without assigning any reason disagreed with the report of the enquiry officer and passed an order as a punishment for the removal of the respondent from the service. This order of punishment was passed on 20 December, 1965.

(3.) THERE are certain other aspects, which may be noticed but are otherwise irrelevant while the matter was pending before the Tribunal. At one stage, the proceedings were dismissed for default and as the Tribunal had declined to restore the proceedings the respondent had filed Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. In reference to this, the Tribunal itself records that it met with no success. Nevertheless, subsequently, the Tribunal took the matter up on merits.