Research › Browse › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

1977 DIGILAW 459 (MP)

Yeshwant Bachhava Babar v. General Manager, Western Rly, Bombay

1977-10-25

B.R.DUBE, S.R.VYAS

body1977
Short Note : 1. Sometime at about 4-30 A. M. on 17-12-1973 some persons were found committing theft of coal from wagons placed at the Railway yard at Ujjain. This incident of theft was reported to the Assistant Security Officer. On this report, enquiries were made and as the petitioner was found involved in the commission of theft and acceptance of illegal gratification, he was suspended on 20-12-1975 by the Assistant Security Officer vide suspension Older (Annexure-A). After being so suspended, the petitioner ordinarily should have been dealt with under the rules in Chapter IX of the Rules framed by the Central Government under section 21 of the, Railway Protection Force Act, 1957. According to rules 40 to 46, there ordinarily should have been a regular enquiry in which the procedure prescribed by the aforesaid rules should have been followed, but the Assistant Security Officer dispensed with the aforesaid prescribed procedure and followed the special procedure laid down in rule 47. Held : In the instant case virtually no reasons have been recorded in the impugned order for feeling satisfied regarding the impracticability for holding the regular enquiry. Consequently the impugned order violates not only the provisions of rule 47 of the Rules but also the provisions of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution. Under these circumstances, the impugned order cannot be maintained and has to be quashed. As the order of removing from service was passed without due compliance of the provisions contained in Chapter IX of the Rules framed under the Act and the provisions of Article 311 of the Constitution of India, the Disciplinary Authority is still free to follow the proper procedure and hold an enquiry against tae petitioner if the facts and circumstances of the case so require. The order passed in this petition shall not debar the Disciplinary authority from taking such action against the petitioner as may be permissible under the rules. 1976 JLJ 855 , AIR 1968 S. C 240, AIR 1972 S C. 2004 and 1977 JLJ S. N. 54, relied on. Petition allowed.