UNION OF INDIA Vs. KAILASH PRASAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Shri D.K. Sinha, learned senior counsel for the petitioners and Shri M.P. Dixit, learned counsel for the respondent.

(2.) The challenge raised to the impugned judgment is on the ground that the respondent-applicant had practically admitted the loss caused to the Railways and, therefore, in terms of Rule 229 of the Indian Railway Commercial Manual (IRCM) the liability was clearly on the respondent-applicant. Hence, the debit-memo issued for recovery of the loss caused is perfectly in order.

(3.) Shri Sinha submits that Rule 229 read with Rule 2721 of the IRCM, where an admitted debit is required to be recovered according to the procedure prescribed therein, the respondent-applicant was rightly served with a debit-memo and therefore the realization made from him is in conformity with the said rules. The contention in short appears to be that since the missing of the tickets has not been denied by the respondentapplicant, therefore, he is also liable to make good the loss to the Railways.