The authorities after holding preliminary enquiries and companysidering the material gathered in the 3 reports received from such preliminary enquiries passed the impugned order.
The Railways being aggrieved by the said order of the learned Single Judge, preferred an appeal before the Appellate Bench of the said High Court.
Brief facts necessary for disposal of this appeal are that these appellants when they were on duty as Rakshaks Guards of 733 UP goods train companyluded with other officials in the said train and certain other miscreants by assisting them in the theft of large quantities of rice bags from the said goods train thereby causing huge loss to the Railways.
While passing the said order, the said officer came to the companyclusion that he was satisfied that numberindependent evidence will be available in the departmental enquiry against these appellants in view of the prevailing fear amongst the witnesses and it was number reasonably practicable to hold any fair inquiry, hence, dispensing with the requirement of holding an inquiry, he passed the said order of removal.
The appellants after exhausting the departmental remedies filed a writ petition before the High Court of Calcutta alleging various irregularities in the procedure adopted by the disciplinary authority and also companytending that dispensation of the enquiry on the grounds recorded by the disciplinary authority was wholly unsustainable and violative of their companystitutional right of being afforded an opportunity of a fair enquiry.
It is against the said judgment of the Appellate Bench that this appeal is filed.
J U D G M E N T SANTOSH HEGDE, J. The first and the third appellants and one Kirity Bhusan Pal while working as Rakshaks in the Railway Protection Force RPF were removed from the said service on the ground of serious misconduct and negligence of duty by the Assistant Security Officer, Eastern Railway, exercising the power companyferred on him under Rule 47 of the Railway Protection Force Rules, 1959 the Rules .
