Navneet Kumar, Member (J) - (1.) PRESENT original application is preferred by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 seeking the following reliefs: - (1) The order dated 19.10.06, Annexure A -1 passed by the Divisional Commercial Manager, N. Rly, Lko reducing the applicant from grade Rs. 5500 -9000 (RSRP) to grade Rs. 3200/ - P.M. at initial stage for a period of 2 years with cumulative effect be set aside including the appellate order dated 15.3.07 Annexure No. A -3 passed by Senior Divl. Comml. Manager, Northern Railway, Lko rejecting the appeal dated 20.11.06 and punishment order dated 19.10.06. (2) The direction passed by Additional Divl. Manager, I, N. Rly, Lko passed vide order dated 23.9.05, remitting the case to the Divisional Commercial Manager, N. Rly, Lko Opposite Party No. 4 from the stage of defence statement as well Major penalty charge sheet issued on 14.12.2000 by Divisional Commercial Manager, N. Rly, Lko Opposite Party No. 4 along with Enquiry report submitted by Enquiry Officer and served upon the applicant vide letter dated 7/12.9.06 be set aside. (3) The cost of the application/suit against the opposite parties be awarded in the interest of justice. (4) Consequential relief including any other relief order which Hon'ble Tribunal deems fit and appropriate in the interest of justice be awarded to the applicant. Brief facts of the case are that while working as a Booking Supervisor, the applicant was issued with a major penalty charge sheet dated 14.12.2000. Ld. Counsel for the applicant submits that the said charge sheet was issued by an incompetent authority. In the said charge sheet, it is being pointed out that applicant while working as Booking Clerk in the Office of the Chief Booking Supervisor he was found responsible for having shortage/outstanding of Rs. 1537.05. The applicant submitted his reply and denied the charges mentioned in the charge sheet. After receipt of the said reply by the applicant the Enquiry Officer was appointed and finally after change of the said Enquiry Officer, another Enquiry Officer was appointed who submitted his report. The applicant was given full opportunity to participate in the enquiry proceeding, but the applicant failed to appear before the Enquiry Officer, therefore, the Enquiry Officer proceeded ex parte and submitted the enquiry report. After receipt of the enquiry report, the applicant submitted representation. Thereafter Disciplinary Authority imposed a punishment of reduction of pay of the applicant from grade of Rs. 5500 -9000 to the grade of Rs. 3200 -4900 for a period of five years. Against the said punishment order the applicant preferred appeal and the said appeal was considered and rejected by the Appellate Authority and punishment awarded by the Disciplinary Authority was upheld by the Appellate Authority. Feeling aggrieved by the said action of the respondents the applicant preferred the present original application.
(2.) THE respondents filed their reply. Through reply it was pointed out by the respondents that during preventive check conducted by the Vigilance Department on 04.07.2000 it was detected that the applicant who was working as Booking Clerk due to lack of his sincerity caused loss to the railway administration. As such, the applicant failed to maintain absolute integrity, devotion to duty and acted in a manner of unbecoming of a railway servant, therefore, a major penalty charge sheet dated 14.12.2000 was issued by the Divisional Commercial Manager, Lucknow being Disciplinary Authority of the applicant. After receipt of the defence reply the Enquiry Officer was appointed and subsequently the Enquiry Officer was changed on administrative grounds. Another Enquiry Officer, Sri P.S. Kapoor was appointed on 14.08.2001 who submitted his finding on 28.09.2004. The applicant failed to submit reply to the Enquiry officers Report within the stipulated period of 10 days. Accordingly the case was decided ex parte by the Senior DCM by taking into consideration the materials available on record and awarded punishment of reduction of pay from the existing grade of Rs. 5500 -9000 to initial grade of Rs. 3200 -4900 for a period of 5 years with cumulative effect. The applicant preferred an appeal and the said appeal was also considered and decided by the appellate Authority on the basis of the materials available on record. The Appellate Authority set aside the punishment and ordered further enquiry from the stage of written statement. Accordingly another Enquiry Officer was appointed and after conducting full -fledged enquiry he submitted the report on 17.08.2006 proving the charges. The report of the Enquiry Officer was duly served upon the applicant for submitting representation and after receipt of the representation dated 20.09.2006 impugned punishment order was issued for reduction of initial grade of Rs. 3200 -4900 for a period of two years with cumulative effect. The applicant thereafter submitted his appeal on 20.11.2006 and the said appeal was also considered and rejected on 15.03.2007. Ld. Counsel for the respondents also categorically pointed out that since full -fledged enquiry was conducted and the applicant was given full opportunity to appear in the departmental proceeding, as such, nothing requires to be adjudicated in this case. The scope of judicial review in the disciplinary matters is not called for, as such the original application is liable to be dismissed. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant filed rejoinder and through rejoinder mostly the averments made in the original application are reiterated. No new facts were brought on record.
(3.) HEARD ld. Counsel for the parties at length and perused the pleadings and materials available on record.;