RAM DEO PRASAD SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the orders contained in Annexure 13, whereby and where under the advice of the Union Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as 'the Commission ') has been conveyed to the Secretary to the Government of India, Railway Board, Ministry of Railway on the departmental proceeding against the petitioner wherein it has been considered that the ends of justice would be met in this case if the entire monthly pension otherwise admissible to him (the petitioner) is withheld on a permanent basis and, further, the gratuity admissible to him be released and Annexure 14 conveying that the President, on consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case and also taking into account all other aspects relevant to the case, has concluded that the ends of justice would be met in this case if the entire monthly pension otherwise admissible to the petitioner is withheld on a permanent basis and, further, the gratuity admissible to him should be released. The petitioner has also challenged the validity of the appellate order passed by the Chief Security Commissioner, R.P.F., Eastern Railway,contained in Annexure 18, saying that the delinquent has duly received all other retirement benefits like gratuity and provident fund as per the order of Hon 'ble President of India and it is not within his competence to alter the order of the Hon'ble President of India in any way and thus rejecting and disposing of the appeal.

(2.) IN short, the relevant facts are that only three months before the date of superannuation of the petitioner on 31.8.1993 he was detailed for cash safe escorting duty Ex -BRKA to GMO by 132 Dn. Passenger train along with Naik Late Budhan Shaw and Constable T.C. Singh on 27.5.1993. The petitioner being the seniormost officer was the leader of the team. The allegation is that he did not board in Guard 's lobby which was close to luggage in which cash safes were loadged, despite availability of space. He rather boarded in SLR No. ER/7834 and got mixed up with passengers and thereby facilitated the commission of dacoity in the said luggage at Arigada B. H. Thus, he failed to maintain proper alertness by standing near doors to take prompt action against miscreants who fled away with Railway cash of Rs. 2,28,677/ - and vouchers for Rs. 46,71,403/ - excluding earning of Kamandi Railway Station along with 29 rounds of ammunition of Constable T.C. Singh and Naik Late Budhan Shaw. It is alleged that the petitioner was sitting just near the east window and when the criminals threw bombs, he failed to react and did not fire at them despite availability of Rifle No. P -14/96003 with 25 rounds with him issued by command certificate no. 30(5)93 dated 27.5.1993. It is further alleged that while the dacoity was committed in the luggage compartment of SLR No. ER/7834 at GMO/end hardly 10 metres away from him and Late Naik Budhan Shaw was crying for help, who was in Guard 's lobby next to him, he despite availability of rifle with ammunitions did not show proper courage to tame at the criminals, rather he concealed himself at Barka/end of the said passenger compartment of S.L.R. and did not fire at the criminals which tan -tamounts to an act of cowardice. It is also alleged that the petitioner was seniormost among three staff detailed for cash safe escorting duty by train No. 132 Dn. Ex. BRKA to GMO on 27.5.1993 failed to properly command his juniors by keeping them in one group in Guard 's lobby next to the luggage compartment in which cash safes were loaded. Thus, he failed to remain in one group for better protection of cash safes and prove closer watch over cash safes from hitch. He also failed to ask for safety chains which were available with HC/R.B. Rawat who issued arms and ammunition and thereby he committed offence of violation of duty under rule 147(i) of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Rules ').

(3.) IN all six prosecution witnesses were examined. The petitioner was absent and for a considerable time his resumption was awaited and lastly 18.8.1993 was fixed for the enquiry, about which an intimation was served on him at his native place.