SC Restores CAT Order Reinstating Railway Employee; High Court Erred in Upholding Dismissal

SC Restores CAT Order Reinstating Railway Employee; High Court Erred in Upholding Dismissal

The appellant, late V.M. Saudagar, a Travelling Ticket Examiner with Central Railway, was dismissed in 1996 following a vigilance check alleging bribery, possession of excess cash, and forgery of a duty card pass. The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Mumbai, in 2002 quashed the dismissal and ordered reinstatement with full benefits. However, the Bombay High Court in 2017 reversed CAT’s decision, restoring the dismissal. The employee died during the pendency of the case, and his legal heirs pursued the appeal before the Supreme Court.

Counsel for the appellants contended that the Enquiry Officer relied on untested evidence, as the principal complainant was never examined and other witnesses did not support the charges. The disciplinary authority merely copied the enquiry report without independent reasoning. It was also argued that the alleged excess cash was lawfully deposited and that no rule barred a TTE from carrying personal money.

The respondent Railways maintained that the enquiry was fair, the findings supported by evidence, and CAT had exceeded its jurisdiction in reappreciating facts.

Issue Raised: Whether the High Court erred in interfering with CAT’s finding that the disciplinary proceedings and dismissal were unsustainable for lack of evidence and procedural fairness.

SC’s Judgment: The Supreme Court held that none of the four charges was proved conclusively. Key witness Hemant Kumar was never examined; other passengers denied any demand for money. Reliance on untested statements violated natural justice. The amount was deposited in the Railway accounts; no circular prohibiting possession existed at the time. The alleged short recovery of Rs. 18 was unsubstantiated; no passenger or receipt record was produced. No handwriting expert examined the duty pass; even the enquiry officer did not find this charge proved.

CAT had correctly found the findings perverse and set aside the penalty; the High Court failed to apply settled law limiting interference to cases of procedural illegality. The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s judgment, restored CAT’s 2002 order, and directed the release of all consequential monetary and pensionary benefits to the legal heirs within three months.

To Read Full Judgment, Download PDF Given Below