IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA --------- Civil Writ Jurisdiction Case No.14074 of 2010 -------- 1. Union Of India through Chairman, Railway Board, Rail Bhawan, New Delhi. 2. The General Manager, Eastern Railway, 17 N.S. Road, Fairie Place, Kolkota. 3. The D.R.M. Eastern Railway, Danapur, Patna 4. Dr. D.P.O. , Eastern Railway, Danapur- Patna. 5. Sr. D.E.N (2), Eastern Railway,Danapur- Patna 6. Sr. D.A.O. Eastern Railway,Danapur, District- Patna................................................. Petitioners Versus Rang Lal Singh, Son of late Ram Sakal Singh, Ex. Sr. S.E. ( P. Way ), Eastern Railway, Arah, R/o village and Post- Dhanauti, Bhojpur.................... Respondents ------- For Railway :- Sri D.K.Sinha, Sr. Advocate & Sri Binod Jee Verma,Advocate For the O.Pary: Mr. N.P. Dixit, Advocate -------- 3 30-9-2011 Heard the parties. There is no difficulty in deciding the issue of law involved in this writ petition in view of recent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vrs. Alok Kumar, reported in (2010) 5 SCC 349. Now the law has been settled that under the relevant rules the railway authority can appoint even a retired officer as an enquiry 2 officer to conduct enquiry in a departmental proceeding. Hence, the view taken by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna in the impugned order dated 3-2-2009 in O.A. No. 616 of 2002 has to be reversed. Accordingly, that order is quashed and petitioners are given liberty to ensure that the enquiry officer earlier appointed or any other enquiry officer conducts and completes the enquiry at the earliest and in any case within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Since the respondent employee superannuated on 31-5-2002 and being of old age, he is residing at his village address at Buxar, we accept his request that the enquiry should be conducted at Danapur from where he superannuated and not at Lucknow as was the earlier direction of the authority. Had the issue not been decided by the Apex Court, we would have dismissed the writ petition on the limitation itself because the Tribunal has decided the case in the year 2009 requiring conclusion of the enquiry within six months. The writ petition was preferred on 25th August, 2010. The writ petition is allowed to the aforesaid 3 extent. In case enquiry is not concluded within three months from the date of production/receipt of a copy of this order, the respondent/employee will be at liberty to file a contempt petition. Naresh ( Shiva Kirti Singh, J.) ( Shivaji Pandey,J)