R. N. Chaudhary v. The Union Of India And ORS
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.671 of 2018 ===========================================================
1. R. N. Chaudhary, Son of Sri Shital Chaudhary, resident of Mohallah- Lohiya Nagar, Barmasia, Near St. Stephens School, North Side, P.O. & P.S.- Katihar, District- Katihar (Bihar).
.... .... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The Union of India through the General Manager, N.F. Railway, Maligaon, Guwahati, Assam
2. The Divisional Railway Manager, N.F. Railway, Katihar
3. The Senior Divisional Personnel Officer, N.F. Railway, Katihar
4. The Senior Divisional Operating Manager, N.F. Railway, Katihar
5. The Divisional Operating Manager (G), N.F. Railway, Katihar .... .... Respondent/s =========================================================== Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Munna Pd Dixit (M.P. Dixit), Advocate Mr. S.K. Dixit, Advocate Mr. S.K. Choubey, Advocate Mrs. Swastika, Advocate Mr. Shailendra Kumar, Advocate Mr. Sunil Kumar, Advocate For the Respondent/s : Mr. Anil Kumar Sinha, Advocate Mr. Akash Keshav, Advocate =========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE JUSTICE SMT. NILU AGRAWAL ORAL JUDGMENT (Per: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI) Date: 15-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and counsel for the Railways.
We are in agreement with the reasons which have been provided by the Tribunal that no interference is required at the stage of issuance of charge-sheet. In the given background of the material facts, the Tribunal had this to say :
"4. Thereafter, what order the Appellate
Patna High Court CWJC No.671 of 2018 dt.15-01-2018 2/3 Authority had passed not been placed on record. In addition, the applicant has not brought on record full sequence of events.
Instead he has directly placed on record the order dated 20.01.2012 in O.A. No. 666 of 2004 by which the proceeding from the stage of charge sheet was quashed with liberty to the respondents to proceed a fresh as directed by the Hon'ble High Court in the judgment in CWJC No. 11559/2005 with 11570/2005 and 12077/2005.
5. The applicant's counsel submitted that charge memo has been issued in a wrong proforma as he is a retired employee.
6. It is well settled in law that in such a matter, the mention of a wrong procedure or incorrect proforma does not vitiate the proceeding. The substance of the issue is the main consideration the charge sheet has been issued in the wake of a major train accident.
7. In accordance with the Court's directions, respondents have issued a charge memo which has been challenged in this O.A. It is well settled in law that Tribunal should not normally interfere at the stage of charge sheet as charge sheet does not give any cause of action to a delinquent to approach a Court. An enquiry has to be allowed to proceed. Furthermore, this charge sheet have been issued in accordance
Patna High Court CWJC No.671 of 2018 dt.15-01-2018 3/3 with the direction of the Hon'ble High Court, Patna and the Tribunal. Therefore, this O.A. is misconceived. Hence, the O.A. is dismissed. No costs."
The reason for non-interference seems to be valid. Writ is dismissed.
(Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J) (Nilu Agrawal, J) Rajesh/- AFR/NAFR NAFR CAV DATE NA Uploading Date17.01.2018 Transmission Date NA