tl \* *'r'T\ #14 t0-02-2009 Present: Mr. S.C.Saxena, Adv. for the Petitioner. Ms. Geetanjali Mohan, Adv. for the Respondent. + WP (C) No.3939/2007 * The petitioner herein, after holding departmental enquiry imposed the penalty of removal of service. He preferred departmental appeal there against which was decided by the Appellate Authority vide orders dated 1.9.1994. Perusal of the said order indicates that though the Appellate Authority was of the opinion that ttre Appellate Authority has rightly imposed the penalty of removal from service because of the reason that the misconduct and behavior of the petitioner was gross, keeping in view his pitiable and critical financial condition arising out of this penalty accompanied by trauma of four daughters including of one deaf and dumb minor daughterg, being out of service, sympathetic view was taken and the petitioner was reinstated in service as Chargeman Grade B (the post which he was holding before the imposition of penalty) at the stage of Rs.1400/-in the pay scale of Rs. 1400-2300. Signed By:RAM DATT Signing Date:20.07.2024 17:18 Certify that the digital and physical file have been compared and the digital data is as per the physical file and no page is missing. Signature Not Verified 12- The Railway Employees (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1968 provide for penalties which can be imposed upon a delinquent railway servant among major penalties, penalty of this nature is provided in clause v of Rule 6 which reads as under : "[Save as otherwise provided for in clause(iii-b)] reduction to the lower stage in the time-scale of pay for a specified period, with fuither directions as to whether on the expiry of such period, the reduction will or will not have the effect of \F postponing the future increments of is pay." It is clear from the above that reduction to the lower stage in the time scale of pay has to be for a specific period as stipulated in the aforesaid Rule. Although the Rule is abundantly clear, the department has issued a further clarification in its circular dated 2I.12.1960 and 28.2.1962 which provides: - "The order of reduction to be specified- Every order passed -t' by a competent authority imposing the penalty of reduction to a loweistage in time scale should indicate: (a) The date from which it will take effect and the period for which the penalty shall be operated; (b) The stage in the time-scale (in terms of rupees) to which the Railway servant is reduced; and , (c) The extent (in terms of years and months, if any) to which the period referred to in (a) above should operate to postpone future increments. [R.B.'s No F(E) 71 FR-1/2 dated 10.7.1971and F(E) 60 FR ll2 of 22.8.19621 l-' 1 t2 ,L The reduction to a lower stage in a time -scale for an unspecified period or as a permanent measure is not permissible under the rules. When an employee is reduced to a particular stage his pay will remain constant at the state for the entire period of reduction . The period to be specified under (c) should not in any case exceed the period specified under (a) above. I R.B.'s No. F(E) 57-FNIll of 22.11960 and F(E) 60- FRl/2 of2I.12.1960l" It was thus incumbent upon the Appellate Authority, while imposing the aforesaid penalty to indicate the period for which penalty was to be imposed and such a penalty could not have been for an unspecified period or as a permanent measure which is not permissible under the Rules. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the Rule 6 provides that where period of reduction is not specified the Railway servant should be deemed to be reduced for an indefinite period. However, such course of action is permissible only if penalty under Clause (vi) of Rule 6 is given which prescribes reduction to a pay, pay grade or service. In the instant case the penalty imposed is that the petitioner shall reduce to a lower time scale of pay or lower grade or lower service. Thus the penalty imposed is under Clause (v) of Rule 6 and therefore specific period had to be stipulated. ,3Ql th t1 bL The impugned order of the Tribunal is accordingly set aside to the aforesaid extent. As a consequence the order of the respondent dated 1.9.1994 is also set aside to that extent. Instead, the Appellate Authority shall now pass an order specifying the period of penalty, within two months from today. The writ petition is allowed partly in the aforesaid terms. SU X'ebruary 10, 2009 mm Nry RESH KAIT,J l\