UNION OF INDIA Vs. RAYEES ­ UL- HAQUE
LAWS(ALL)-2018-11-240
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on November 16,2018

UNION OF INDIA Appellant
VERSUS
Rayees ? Ul- Haque Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

LT. GOVERNOR,DELHI AND OTHERS V. HC NARINDER SINGH [REFERRED TO]
K R DEB VS. COLLECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE SHILLONG [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF ASSAM VS. J N ROY BISWAS [REFERRED TO]
COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT OTHERS VS. A S JAGANNATHAN [REFERRED TO]
CANARA BANK VS. SWAPAN KUMAR PANI [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. KUNISETTY SATYANARAYANA [REFERRED TO]
KANIALAL BERA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
VIJAY SHANKAR PANDEY VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

MANOJ MISRA, J. - (1.)The instant petition has been filed by Union of India through its Department of Railways along with officers of the Railway Department against the judgment and order 18.05.2012 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad (for short the 'Tribunal') in O.A. No. 1093 of 2006 by which the original application filed by the first respondent (Rayees-Ul-Haque) was allowed; the major penalty charge- sheet dated 12.07.2004; removal order dated 31.01.2006; and the appellate order dated 16.06.2006 were quashed.
(2.)The relevant facts of the case are as follows: The first respondent was an Inquiry-cum-reservation clerk posted at Gorakhpur. A minor penalty charge-sheet was served upon him on 11.03.2004 alleging that from April 2003 to June 2003, he had issued 50 concession tickets on forged concession vouchers thereby causing loss to the Railways. The first respondent denied the allegations. After considering the reply, the Assistant Commercial Manager vide order dated 19.04.2004 imposed punishment of stoppage of next increment for a period of six months temporarily and directed for recovery of Rs.26,636/- from the first respondent in lieu of the loss suffered by the Railways. This order of punishment was not subjected to appeal by the first respondent. Thereafter, on 12.07.2004, the first respondent was served with a major penalty charge-sheet essentially on the same set of facts that is of issuing concessional tickets on forged concession vouchers, but by leveling other serious charges of misconduct.
(3.)Against issuance of major penalty charge-sheet, the first respondent filed a representation before the Senior Divisional Commercial Manager on 04.08.2004 by claiming that on the same set of facts two disciplinary proceeding cannot be drawn more so when the earlier proceeding has already been finalized.


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.