ASHIS KUMAR CHAKRABORTY,J. - (1.) The short question of law raised in this writ petition is whether in a disciplinary proceeding, the disciplinary authority can differ with the findings of the enquiry officer absolving the charged employee from the charges framed against him, without granting the charged employee an opportunity of hearing.
(2.) In this writ petition the petitioner has challenged the order dated November 17, 2008 passed by the Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Eastern Railway, Kolkata dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner by affirming the decision dated January 21, 2008 passed by the Senior Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Eastern Railway, Howrah, being the disciplinary authority, imposing the punishment on the petitioner of dismissal from service. This writ petition has a chequered background and this is the third occasion when the writ petitioner has approached this Court to challenge the decision of the disciplinary authority as well as the appellate authority.
(3.) The facts giving rise to the present writ petition are that while serving as a constable in the Railway Protection Force of Eastern Railway posted at Howrah station, the petitioner received a charge sheet dated September 07,1998 issued by the Assistant Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Howrah-1 wherein it was alleged that on August 15, 1998 while being on duty along with arms at platform nos. 1 to 8 at Howrah Station, he forcibly extorted cash amounting to Rs.13,800/- from a bona fide passenger and being apprehended by other passengers, he returned Rs.9,200/- to the said passenger and as such, the petitioner acted in a manner prejudicial to discipline and conducted himself in such a way, which brought discredit to the reputation of the Force as per Rule 146.4 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1987. After the Railway Authority decided to initiate a disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner on the grounds of charges framed against him in the said charge sheet dated September 07, 1998, an enquiry officer was appointed by the disciplinary authority. The enquiry officer in his report found that the charges against the petitioner were proved and on December 09, 1998 the disciplinary authority accepted the enquiry officer's report and dismissed the petitioner from his service. An appeal filed by the petitioner before the Chief Security Commissioner, Railway Protection Force, Eastern Railway against the decision of the disciplinary authority was rejected on February 14, 1999. Challenging the decision of the appellate authority and the said decision of the disciplinary authority dismissing him from service, the petitioner filed his first writ petition, being W.P. 8790 (W) of 2000 before this Court. On July 24, 2000 a learned Single Judge of this Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner. The petitioner carried the said order of dismissal in appeal, being M.A.T. No. 93 of 2001. By the judgment and order dated July 27, 2006 the Division Bench of this Court allowed the said appeal and set aside the decision of the appellate authority the decision of the disciplinary authority dismissing the petitioner from service. By the said order dated July 27, 2006 the Division Bench of this Court though reinstated the petitioner in service but directed that the petitioner put under deemed suspension with corresponding liberty to the administration to start the proceeding de novo from the stage of submission of reply to the charge-sheet.;