Deceased Railway Employee's Widow Entitled To Challenge Penalty Imposed On Him To Remove Stigma: Gujarat High Court

The Gujarat High Court has observed that a deceased Railway employee's widow is legally entitled to challenge penalty imposed on her husband, and she and his family members are the real aggrieved persons and have the legal right to remove the stigma attached to their breadwinner.The court passed the order in Railway's plea against a Central Administrative Tribunal's order quashing penalty of removal from service imposed on deceased employee after noting that the employee had not been heard. The CAT had directed the Railways to communicate order of imposition of penalty within one month to the employee's widow and had permitted to file a representation. Against this Railways had moved the high court. A division bench of Justice NS Sanjay Gowda and Justice JL Odedra in its order said:"It may be pertinent to state here that the notice of the imposition of penalty was admittedly not served on the employee during his life time and, as a consequence, the deceased employee had lost his valuable right to represent against the imposition of any major penalty and also bring it to the notice of the Disciplinary authority with proof of his ill health. The Inquiry Officer has also, admittedly, not held that the absence was wilful. In that view of the matter, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the application of the respondent and quashing the order passed against her deceased husband. The argument that the wife i.e., the respondent could not have challenged the imposition of penalty is wholly untenable. If in a given situation, the employee, who had suffered a penalty and had passed away, his widow and family members would obviously be the real aggrieved persons and, therefore, they would have the legal right to remove the stigma attached to their breadwinner".In 2008 the Railways had initiated departmental proceedings against the employee for his alleged unauthorized absence from service. However even before this charge sheet had been issued, on 16.04.2008 admittedly the husband of the respondent had submitted a request for being permitted to retire voluntarily. In other words, he had sought for Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) on about a month prior to issuance of chargesheet.Railways imposed punishment of removal from service on 23.08.2013. It was contended that the notice of imposition of penalty was never served on the husband of the respondent, which the Tribunal has found to be true, and as consequence, the deceased employee had lost an opportunity to plead his case before the Disciplinary Authority.Meanwhile the husband who had suffered the penalty, passed away on 20.06.2015. The respondent, being the widow, sought for disbursal of terminal benefits soon thereafter and also sought for compassionate appointment, since this was not paid to her, ostensibly on the ground that a penalty of removal was passed against her deceased husband. She approached the CAT which passed the order in her favour. The high court found that though CAT quashed the penalty and directed Railways to reconsider matter, admittedly the deceased employee's request for voluntary retirement though submitted before the issuance of the charge sheet, wherein he had stated that he was seeking for retirement due to his ill health was fundamentally ignored by the Railways."If the employee had sought for retirement voluntarily citing his poor health, it was improper on the part of the Railways to have even proceeded against its employee without considering the request of the employee. In the background of the fact that the charge was of unauthorised absence and the reason cited for retiring voluntarily due to ill-health was made and the employee had ultimately passed away, by itself, would be proof of the fact that his unauthorised absence could be attributable to his ill-health. In our view, in the light of this extenuating factor, the Railways ought to have considered the VRS, especially since it had been made before the chargesheet had been issued," the court said. The court said that only after considering the VRS the Railways should have decided on the Departmental Inquiry. That process not been followed, severe prejudice has been caused to the deceased Railway employee and consequently on his widow, it said.The court thus modified the CAT's order and directed the Railways to accept the VRS submitted by the deceased employee and extend all consequential benefits to his widow. This exercise is to be completed within 3 months.The plea was disposed of. Case title: UNION OF INDIA & ORS. v/s BHANUBEN W/O MANOJBHAI DHIRUBHAI RATHOD R/SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 5667 of 2023Click Here To Read/Download Order

Deceased Railway Employee's Widow Entitled To Challenge Penalty Imposed On Him To Remove Stigma: Gujarat High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags