UNION OF INDIA Vs. MALLICK MOHAMMAD ILLYAS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal is by the defendant Union of India the owner of North Eastern Railway Administration and is directed against the judgment dated the 10th May, 1962, of Mr. Krishna Devi Prasad, Additional Subordinate Judge, Patna, affirming those dated the 29th April, 1961, passed by Mr. R. J. Pandey, Munsif 1st Court, Patna, who thereby decreed the suit in full.

(2.) The plaintiff, who is the respondent here, is a confirmed railway employee of the North Eastern Railway Administration. He was appointed on 11-6-1948 as a Ticket Collector and in the year 1956 he was as such posted at Digha Ghat Station. His case is that on 14-11-56 he fell ill and reported sick and gave a memo, of sickness to the Station Master, Digha Ghat. Thereafter on recovery he rejoined the post at that very Station and continued to work as usual up to 17th April, 1957. In the meantime it appears that on 17th November 1956, one Md. Qayum was detected travelling on his return Journey from Bombay at Bhusawal, a place at a distance of about 900 miles from Digha and Patna, under a forged military railway warrant. When interrogated that man first gave himself out as a havildar clerk and thereafter a businessman and lastly a Ticket Collector at Digha Ghat. This ultimately led to his prosecution and conviction. Thereafter on the report received from there, the North Eastern Railway Administration came to the conclusion that it was the plaintiff of this case who was arrested at Bhusawal and then convicted in the course of the aforesaid incident. Accordingly the plaintiff on 18-4-1957" while working at Digha was all of a sudden put under suspension as per order dated 15-4-57 passed by the District Traffic Superintendent. The plaintiff thereupon on 22-4-1957 in order to acquaint himself with the reasons for his suspension went to Gorakhpur. His case is that there he met various authorities including one Mr. A. Roza, the then Vigilance Officer, Gorakhpur. There, it is said, he was put to various kinds of humiliation and was further forced to affix his finger print on a paper and thereafter to make a statement in writing on behalf of one Qayum. Further while there, it is claimed, his photograph was also taken. Thereafter, it appears, he again went to the office of the Vigilance Officer at Gorakhpur on 3-5-1957, though this time, according to him, at the instance of the Station Master, Digha Ghat. On this occasion, it is said, while he was there, he was literally confined in his office and again his forced handwriting on two other sheets of paper was taken. Subsequently on 11-7-57 a copy of the charge-sheet dated 26-6-57, which is exhibit 5 on the record, was served on him. He was thereunder charged for serious misconduct under Rule 1702 R. I. of the Establishment Code, Volume I. The specific allegations that are stated in its Annexure 'A' are as follows:

(3.) The Railway Administration in their written statement have controverted all, the clarifications and allegations made in the show cause of the plaintiff and have stuck to what is stated in the charge-sheet. Further they have also pleaded that the delay in the disposal of the enquiry was due to the non-co-operative tactics of the plaintiff in the course of that enquiry.