PRATAP KUMAR RAY, J. - (1.) Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties.
(2.) Assailing the order dated July 31, 2008 passed in O.A. No. 756/2008 by Central Administrative Tribunal, Calcutta Bench, this writ application has been filed. The issue involved herein is on a very short question whether on cancelling a first charge-sheet as issued in a departmental proceeding second charge-sheet could be issue without disclosing the sufficient reasons while issuing the second charge-sheet on dropping the first disciplinary proceeding. The writ petitioner is a Railway employee and is controlled by the regulation framed by the Railway Authority. The Railway Board has framed a rule on issue when any departmental proceeding is dropped and subsequently proceeding is initiated by a fresh charge-sheet. Railway Board has framed the guidance and necessary action and it ultimately became a rule by incorporating the same in the Manual under Index No. 1033. The relevant communication of the Railway Board and the Index No. as it appears from the circular letters submitted before us being the circular letter issued for Chief Personnel Officer being No. 308/O/Vol. XV dated Calcutta, the January 17, 1994 under Serial No. 10/94 read with the Railway Board's letter No. E(D&A)93 RG6-83 dated December 1, 1993 (RBE No. 171/1993) addressed to G.M. (P), All Indian Railways and Others, reads such: "Eastern Railway No. E-308/O/Vol.XV SI.No. 10/1994 Calcutta, the January 17, 1994 All concerned. Sub: Issuing fresh charge Memorandum after cancellation/withdrawal of original charge Memorandum of after dropping disciplinary proceedings. A Copy of Railway Board's letter No. E (D&A) 93 RG6-83 dated December 1, 1993 (R.B.E. No. 171/1993) is forwarded for information, guidance and necessary action. Sd/- For Chief Personnel Officer. Copy of Railway Board's letter No. E (D&A) 93 RG6-83 dated December 1, 1993 (RBE No. 171/1993) addressed to G.M. (P), All Indian Railways and Others. Sub: Issuing fresh charge Memorandum after cancellation/withdrawal of original charge Memorandum of after dropping disciplinary proceedings. It has come to the notice of the Railway Board that on one of the Zonal Railways, the Memorandum of charges issued to an employee was withdrawn by the disciplinary authority with the intention of issuing fresh detailed charge Memorandum. However, while withdrawing the charge-sheet, no reasons therefor were given and it was only stated that the charge-sheet was being withdrawn. The issue of a fresh charge Memorandum subsequently was challenged by the employee before CAT/Bombay The Central Administrative Tribunal on nearing the case have quashed the said charge Memorandum holding that unless there is a power in the disciplinary authority by virtue of the rules or administrative instructions to give another charge-sheet on the same facts after withdrawing the first one, the second charge-sheet will be entirely without authority. 2. The matter has been examined and it is clarified that once the proceedings initiated under Rule 9 or Rule 11 of RS (D&A) Rules, 1968 are dropped, the disciplinary authorities would be debarred from initiating fresh proceedings against the delinquent officers unless the reasons for cancellation of the original charge Memorandum or for dropping the proceedings are appropriately mentioned and it is duly stated in the order that the proceedings were being dropped without prejudice to further action which may be considered in the circumstances of the case. It is, therefore, necessary that when the intention is to issue a fresh charge-sheet subsequently, the order cancelling the original one or dropping the proceedings should be carefully worded so as to mention the reasons for such an action indicating the intention of issuing charge-sheet afresh appropriate to the nature of the charges. Please acknowledge receipt. Index No. 1033: Sufficient reasons should be worded for issuing fresh charge Memorandum after cancellation/ withdrawal of original charge Memorandum or after dropping disciplinary proceedings."
(3.) It is an admitted position that the first charge-sheet as issued by issuing a memorandum No. SDA/VIG/875 dated December 20, 2005 containing statement of article of charges and the list of the documents as to be relied upon including the list of witnesses was withdrawn by letter No. SDA/VIG/875 Sealdah dated August 30, 2006 by the Divisional Operations Manager without prejudice to the liberty to issue a fresh major penalty memorandum on the same charge and the subsequent charge memo issued under Memo No. SDA/VIG/875 dated October 5, 2006/October 10, 2006 is on the identical charge with identical statement of imputation of misconduct and other particulars.;