SHEIKH MD QUASIM Vs. CHIEF SECURITY OFFICER E

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, who was a Senior Rakshak and posted at Garhara in the year 1972, has filed this application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India praying to quash Annexure '1/3' (order of the Assistant Security Officer, respondent No. 3, dated the 16th of September, 1972 demoting him to the post of Rakshak for a period of two years), Annexure '1/5' (order of the Security Officer-respondent No. 2, removing him from service and Annexure '1/6' (Order of the Chief Security Officer-respondent No. 1, dated the 11th of June, 1973 dismissing his appeal and affirming the order of removal as passed by the security officer).

(2.) Shortly stated, the relevant facts for the decision of this applitcation are that the petitioner who was Senior Rakshak at the relevanh time and was posted at Garhara was served with charges dated the 14trs January, 1972 and was asked to show cause. The two charges as appea from Annexure '1' were that the petitioner on the 3rd of January, I976 at 22,50 hours committed pilferage of sugar from wagon No. W.R. 37402 while standing on Line No. 2 shunting neck along with R. K. Sarbesh Singh and that he assaulted A.S.I. Sitaram Singh on his head resulting in bleeding injury. The petitioner filed show cause to the two charges mentioned above. The show cause was not found satisfactory and, therefore, a departmental enquiry was ordered in the matter.

(3.) The defence of the petitioner as appears from the statement made in this application and also from the enquiry report, was that he was falsely implicated as he refused to give evidence at the instance of A.S.I. Sita Ram Singh against R. K. Sarbesh Singh and that he was at AYM'S cabin between 22.40 and 23.00 hours. In support of the defence version the petitioner examined three witnesses and also produced document which proved that the petitioner was in the cabin between 22.40 and 23 00 hours. The Enquiring Officer on a consideration of the evidence adduced on behalf of both parties, came to the conclusion that the petitioner had committed pilferage of sugar at 23.00 hours and that Ruakshak, Sarbesh Singh assaulted Sita Ram Singh on his leg with lathi. On these findings the Enquiring Officer was of the opinion that the two charges levelled against the petitioner were true. The enquiring Officer submitted his report to the Assistant Security Officer, who agreed with the findings of the Enquiring Officer and imposed a punishment of reduction to the post of Rakshak for two years, Thereafter the Security officer issued a notice of his own under Rule 60 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1959 (hereinafter referred to as "The Rules") to show cause as to why the petitioner should not be removed from service. The petitioner filed a detailed show cause challenging the findings arrived at by the Enquiring Officer and the order of demotion for two years as passed by the Assistant Security Officer. The Security Officer on a consideration of the matter was of the opinion that the charge of pilferage was quite a serious one which should not be lightly treated. He, therefore, directed that the petitioner should be removed from service (vide Annexure l/5').