JOGESHWAR SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is a Constable in the Railway Protection Force, Northern Railway, and was posted at Bikaner in February, 1987. In the late evening on February 18, 1987, while on duty, he was found drunk and under the influence of liquor. At that time, he addressed abusive words to his superiors and left duty without any permission. A disciplinary action was initiated against him. Charges were framed and the charge-sheet was issued to him. During inquiry, the petitioner nominated one Mr. Syed Aga Ali as his defence nominee to present his case with his assistance Mr. Syed Aga Ali is also a member of the Railway Protection Force-being the Prosecuting Inspector. THE inquiry officer turned down the aforesaid request of the petitioner on the ground that Mr. Syed Aga Ali is a lawyer by profession THE grievance of the petitioner, raised in this writ petition, is that the Prosecuting Inspectors and Sub-Inspectors are members of the Railway Protection Force. Simply because they prosecuted the cases in the Court on behalf of the Railway Protection Force, they cannot be deemed to be the lawyers. As such, the respondents be directed to permit him to utilize the services of Mr. Syed Aga Ali to assist him in his case.

(2.) IN the return filed by the respondents, the stand taken is that the Head Office, Northern Railway, in its letter Annexure R/l dated April 9, 1974 took the view that the Prosecuting INspectors and Sub-INspectors should not be allowed to act as defence nominees in disciplinary cases. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(3.) FOR the reasons stated above, we allow the Wirt petition. Order Annexure-4 dated May 18, 1987 and Annexure-2 dated June 16, 1987 are set-aside- The respondents are directed to permit the petitioner to present his case with the assistance of Mr. Syed Aga Ali, subject to the conditions that Mr. Aga Ali is prepared and willing to assist the petitioner and he is not assisting more than one member of the FORce.