The Enquiry Officer fixed the date of enquiry on May 11, 1970 at Ghaziabad.
Thereafter, the appellant moved the High Court by a petition under Art.
The Enquiry Officer accordingly proceeded ex parte and examined witnesses.
By his report dated May 26, 1971, the Enquiry Officer found the charge proved.
In companypliance the appellant showed cause but his explanation was number accepted.
From the Judgment and Order dated 15th February, 1984 of the Delhi High Court in L.P.A. No.
226 of the Constitution.
The appellant preferred an appeal before the Railway Board under r.18 ii of the Railway Servants Discipline Appeal Rules, 1968 but the Railway Board by the impugned order dated March 11, 1972 dismissed this appeal.
The General Manager agreed with the report of the Enquiry Officer and came to the provisional companyclusion that the penalty of removal from service should be inflicted and issued a show cause numberice dated May 26, 1971.
me appellant therefore preferred a Letter Patent Appeal, but a Division Bench by its order dated February 15, 1984 dismissed the appeal in in limine.
The enquiry companyld number be held on that date due to some administrative reasons and was then fixed for the July 11, 1970.
K. Ramamurthi, M.A. Krishnamoorthy and Mrs. Chandan for the Appellant.
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Civil Appeal No.
The facts, the appellant Ram Chander, Shunter, Grade at Loco Shed Ghaziabad was inflicted the penalty of removal from service under r.6 viii of the Railway Servants Discipline Appeal Rules, 1968 by order of the General Manager, Northern Railway dated August 24, 1971.
P. Sharma, P.P. Singh and C.V. Subba Rao for the Respondent.
The appellant was duly informed of the date but he did number appear at the enquiry.
It is said that the appellant nursed a grouse against Banarsi Das because his refusal to permit him to resume his duties deprived him of the benefit of one days additional wages for October 2, 1969 which was a national holiday.
The gravamen of the charge was that the appellant was guilty of misconduct in that he had October 1, 1969 at 7.30 p.m. assaulted his immediate superior Banarsi Das, Assistant Loco Foreman while he was returning after performing his duties.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by SEN, J. The central question in this appeal is whether the impugned order passed by the Railway Board dated March 11, 1972 dismissing the appeal preferred by the appellant, was number in companyformity with the requirements of r.22 2 of the Railway servants Discipline Appeal Rules, 1968.
1621 of 1986.
The immediate cause for the assault was that the appellant had on September 30, 1969 applied for medical leave for one day i.e. for October 1, 1969.
At the hearing on February 13, 1986, learned companynsel for the Union of India took time to enable the Railway Board to reconsider its decision as to the quantum of punishment.
On that day there was a shortage of Shunters, he accordingly asked Banarsi Das for the cancellation of leave and permit the appellant to resume his duties but Banarsi Das refused to cancel the leave.
Arguments were accordingly heard on the question as to whether the impugned order of the Railway Board was sustainable in law.
178 of 1983.
The General Manager, however, by order dated August 24, 1971 imposed the penalty of removal from service.
