RAM NARAIN Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Clause 10 of the Letters Patent arises out of the judgment of Raj Kishore Prasad, J., who upheld the judgment of the Subordinate Judge, Purnea, dismissing the appellant's suit. The appellant is a railway servant. According to his case, he was appointed as a khalasi of the E. B. Railway in 1926. He came to be promoted as a driver in 1945. He was transferred from the E. B. Railway to the Assam Railway until his services were terminated in 1950 when he was working as a loco-shed driver at Katihar under the Assam Railway. The order of termination of his services was passed by the Deputy Chief Mechanical Engineer, Assam Railway, contained in the letter dated the 20th November, 1950 (Exhibit 1). The ground mentioned in the letter stood thus:

(2.) The suit was resisted by the defendant, Union of India, mainly on the ground that the termination of the service of the plaintiff was legal, proper and equitable and that the order was passed in terms of the agreement executed by him under Rule 148 of the Railway Establishment Code, which was applicable to all non-Gazetted raliway servants to which category the plaintiff belonged. It was denied that he was dismissed at all. The allegation in the plaint that he did not execute any agreement in favour of the E. B. Railway was denied by the defendants.

(3.) The learned Subordinate Judge who tried the suit came to the conclusion on a consideration of the evidence of the parties and the relevant rules governing the conditions of service of the plaintiff that the termination was effected in pursuance of Rule 148 of the Railway Establishment Code and no question of wrongful dismissal of the plaintiff arose in the circumstances. The suit was accordingly dismissed. As I have already stated, the appeal preferred by the plaintiff to this Court, being First Appeal No. 25 of 1955, was also dismissed by the learned single Judge, Hence the present appeal under the Letters Patent.