RAM CHANDER versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

RAM CHANDER versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS.

The appellate authority under Rule 22(2) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968, is required to objectively consider departmental appeals by marshalling the evidence, applying its mind, affording a personal hearing, and passing a reasoned order. Mere mechanical reproduction of statutory language without such consideration amounts to non-compliance, especially in light of the constitutional standards established after the Forty-Second Amendment and the majority interpretation in Tulsiram Patel's case.

Parties
Appellant: Ram Chander; Respondent: Union of India & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 May 1986
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Delhi High Court Judgment and Order, After Dismissal of Writ Petition and Letters Patent Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Disciplinary Proceedings, Natural Justice, Reasoned Orders, Departmental Appeals, Procedural Fairness
Service Law Administrative Law Constitutional Law Disciplinary Proceedings Natural Justice Reasoned Orders Departmental Appeals Procedural Fairness

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 13 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ram Chander

Appellant

Union of India & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From Delhi High Court Judgment and Order, After Dismissal of Writ Petition and Letters Patent Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Railway Board's impugned order dated March 11, 1972, dismissing the appellant's departmental appeal, was in conformity with Rule 22(2) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968
  2. 2 Whether the appellate authority is required to afford a personal hearing and pass a reasoned order in departmental appeals after the Forty-Second Amendment

Ratio Decidendi

The appellate authority under Rule 22(2) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968, is required to objectively consider departmental appeals by marshalling the evidence, applying its mind, affording a personal hearing, and passing a reasoned order. Mere mechanical reproduction of statutory language without such consideration amounts to non-compliance, especially in light of the constitutional standards established after the Forty-Second Amendment and the majority interpretation in Tulsiram Patel's case.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • The judgment and order of the Single Judge and Division Bench of the Delhi High Court and the impugned order of the Railway Board dated March 11, 1972 are set aside.
  • The Railway Board is directed to hear and dispose of the appeal after affording a personal hearing to the appellant on merits by a reasoned order in conformity with Rule 22(2) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968, as expeditiously as possible and in any event not later than four months from the...