Deceased Railway Employee's Dismissal Reversed After 37 Years

Supreme Court Upholds CAT's Decision: Deceased Railway Employee's Dismissal Reversed After 37 Years, Judicial Review in Disciplinary Proceedings: Judicial review in disciplinary proceedings - Findings of the Enquiry Officer must be supported by evidence, and charges must be conclusively proved for imposing a penalty

In a significant judgment, the Supreme Court of India has upheld the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), reinstating a deceased railway employee who was dismissed from service over 37 years ago. The bench, comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and Prashant Kumar Mishra, delivered the judgment in the case of V.M. Saudagar, represented through his legal heirs, against the Divisional Commercial Manager, Central Railway.

The case dates back to May 31, 1988, when V.M. Saudagar, then a Travelling Ticket Examiner (TTE) with Central Railway, was accused of demanding illegal gratification from passengers, possessing excess undeclared cash, failing to recover fare differences, and forging a duty card pass. A surprise check by the Railway vigilance team led to these charges, resulting in his dismissal from service after an enquiry process that concluded in December 1995.

However, the CAT, in 2002, had quashed the dismissal order, reinstating Saudagar with full benefits. This decision was later overturned by the Bombay High Court in 2017, which upheld the railway's dismissal order. The High Court's decision was based on the belief that the Enquiry Officer's findings were supported by evidence.

The Supreme Court, however, found several procedural lapses and insufficient evidence in the enquiry process. Notably, the primary complainant, Hemant Kumar, whose statement was crucial, was never examined or cross-examined. Other witnesses provided contradictory statements, and the charges of possessing excess cash and forgery were not conclusively proven.

The Supreme Court emphasized the necessity for charges to be conclusively proven and supported by evidence in disciplinary proceedings. It found the High Court's reversal of CAT's decision unjustified, deeming the findings of the Enquiry Officer as perverse and not supported by substantial evidence. Consequently, the CAT's order was restored.

In a compassionate move, the court directed that all consequential monetary benefits, including pensionary benefits, be released to the legal heirs of the deceased employee within three months. This judgment reinforces the principles of procedural fairness and the need for conclusive proof in disciplinary actions within public services.

Bottom Line:

Judicial review in disciplinary proceedings - Findings of the Enquiry Officer must be supported by evidence, and charges must be conclusively proved for imposing a penalty - CAT justified in interfering with penalty of dismissal when findings were perverse.

Statutory provision(s): Railway Services (Conduct) Rules, 1966 Rule 3(1)(i) and (ii)

V.M. Saudagar (Dead) v. Divisional Commercial Manager, Central Railway, (SC) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2799417