ARINDAM SINHA,J. - (1.) This appeal is against order dated 18th May, 2007 passed by the disciplinary authority awarding punishment of dismissal from service with effect from 19th May, 2007. The award was in exercise of power given to the disciplinary authority by clause (a) in rule 47 of Railway Protection Force Rules, 1959. The clause in the rule is reproduced below: "47, Special Officer in certain case. - notwithstanding anything contained in Rules 44, 45 and 46, where a penalty is imposed on a member of the Force (a) on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge, (b) ...... the disciplinary authority may consider the circumstances of the case and pass such orders thereon as it deems fit."
(2.) Mr. Roy, learned advocate appears on behalf of appellants and relies on judgment of Supreme Court in Divisional Personnel Officer vs. T. R. Chellappan , 1976 3 SCC 190, paragraph 9. We reproduce below, relevant passage from the paragraph: "......It was for this reason that the founders of the Constitution thought that where once a delinquent employee has been convicted of a criminal offence that should be treated as a sufficient proof of his misconduct and the disciplinary authority may be given the discretion to impose the penalties referred to in Article 311(3), namely, dismissal, removal or reduction in rank. It appears to us that proviso (a) to Article 311(2) is merely an enabling provision and it does not enjoin or confer a mandatory duty on the disciplinary authority to pass an order of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank the moment an employee is convicted. This matter is left completely to the discretion of the disciplinary authority and the only reservation made is that departmental inquiry cotemplated by this provision as also by the Departmental Rules is dispensed with. In these circumstances, therefore, we think that Rule 14(i) of the Rules of 1968 only incorporates the principles enshrined in proviso (a) to Article 311(2) of the Constitution......."
(3.) He submits, impugned order should be set aside in appeal and the order of the disciplinary authority restored, alongwith order passed by the appellate authority rejecting respondent's appeal.;