Paramhans Tripathi vs The Union Of India And 4 Ors
2023 Latest Caselaw 440 Gua

                                                         Page No.# 1/4

GAHC010198882022




                      THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
  (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)

                          Case No. : WP(C)/651/2023

         PARAMHANS TRIPATHI
         SON OF LATE CHHOTALAL TRIPATHI,
         RESIDENT OF 55, NETAJI COLONY,
         DISTRICT- DIMAPUR,
         P.S.- EAST DIMAPUR, NAGALAND.



         VERSUS

         THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS
         REP. BY THE MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS,
         RAIL BHAWAN, NEW DELHI, 110001.

         2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL
          RAILWAY PROTECTION FORCE
          RAIL BHAWAN
          RAILWAY BOARD

         NEW DELHI
         110001.

         3:THE SECURITY COMMISSIONER
          NF RAILWAY
          LUMDING
          NAGAON
          782447.

         4:ASSISTANT SECURITY OFFICER
          PANDU
          NF RAILWAY
          GUWAHATI

         ASSAM
                                                                         Page No.# 2/4

             781011.

            5:THE ASSISTANT SECURITY COMMISSIONER
             NF RAILWAY
             LUMDING
             HOJAI
            ASSAM

Advocate for the Petitioner   : MS. B S GOYAL

Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I.




                                      BEFORE
                       HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVASHIS BARUAH

                                          ORDER

Date : --08.02.2023

Heard Ms. Binita Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and Ms. B. Sharma, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 & 5.

Issue notice making it returnable on 3rd of April/2023.

As the respondents are duly represented by Ms. B. Sharma, extra copies of the writ petition be served upon her within 3 (three) days.

The case of the petitioner herein is that he entered his services in the Railways as Rakshak in the Railway Protection Force vide an order dated 20.05.1969. Thereupon, pursuant to a departmental proceeding, the petitioner was removed from service. Being aggrieved, the petitioner filed the writ petition before this Court, which was registered and numbered as Civil Rule No. 715/1981. This Court vide judgment and order dated 03.03.1989 held that the punishment of removal was shockingly disproportionate and set aside the order of removal and awarded the Page No.# 3/4

penalty of withholding the three increments with immediate effect for the charged misconduct. This Court further held that on reinstatement the petitioner shall be entitled to 25% of the arrear pay and allowances only and that apart that the petitioner shall not be deemed to be in service during the period of absence for the purpose other than pensionary and other terminal benefits. This Court further directed that the order of reinstatement should be passed within a period of one month from the date of judgment and order dated 03.03.1989.

It transpires from the records that the petitioner thereupon, filed a SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court which was registered and numbered as Special Leave to Appeal (Civil) No. 5607/1989. The said SLP was however dismissed vide order dated 06.11.1995. Thereupon, the petitioner submitted a communication to the Security Commissioner, N.F. Railway on 06.12.1995, followed by remainder on 30.04.2002 & 12.12.2003, with a prayer to allow him to join his duty. However, it further appears that the petitioner as per his date of appointment, was to superannuate in the year 2009. Subsequently, thereto on 24.03.2022, the petitioner had submitted representation to the respondent authorities claiming payment of his salary and other entitlements for his service in the Railway protection Force on the basis of the order dated 20.05.1969.

It further appears on records that on 18.05.2022, the said representation was rejected. It is relevant however to take note of that in the said order rejecting the representation, it was mentioned that pursuant to the judgment and order dated 08.03.1989 of this Court, the Divisional Security Commissioner, Lumding directed the Inspector/ RTF/Dimapur to intimate the petitioner to report for duty immediately by Page No.# 4/4

the communication dated 04.04.1989. Subsequent thereto, several attempts were made to contact the petitioner so that the petitioner can be informed about his reinstatement and allowed him to join. However, the petitioner could not be communicated. There is mentioned that, on 05.04.1989, a telegram was received from the petitioner by the office, wherein he was assured to resume duty by 07.04.1989. However, the petitioner did not join on 07.04.1989 nor he made any correspondence for joining the duty.

This Court during the course of the hearing, have made a specific query upon the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Central Government to the effect wherein pursuant to the order passed by this Court, whereby the termination of the petitioner was set aside and the petitioner was directed to be reinstated, were any further disciplinary proceeding were taken/initiated against the petitioner for removing him from service taking into account that the earlier order of the termination was already set aside by this Court in its order dated 08.03.1989.

The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that she shall obtain instructions in this regard.

List the matter accordingly.

JUDGE

Comparing Assistant