KOLKATA: The dismissal of an RPF constable - whose comment on a Facebook group post allegedly eulogized a constable for gunning down his senior during the 2018 Meghalaya election - was reversed by Calcutta HC on Wednesday on the ground that he did not receive a fair hearing.
The RPF was asked to conduct proper disciplinary hearings within eight weeks, given the fact that the constable denied making the comment. The constable, deployed at Purulia under South Eastern Railway before his dismissal, moved the bench of Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury against the order dismissing him from service on May 2, 2018, and the appellate authority order upholding the same on Aug 1.
An assistant commandant of Railway Protection Special Force, M C Tyagi, was shot dead by a constable of his own company while he was deployed on election duty in Meghalaya. The dismissed constable was accused of making certain "objectionable" comments on the incident, which the RPF alleged led to the spread of hatred amongst the ranks. He was suspended on March 28, 2018.
In response to a post on a Facebook group, 'RPF Mutual Transfer', the accused constable allegedly commented: "Is bhai ko RPF taraf se salute ... ab des me sanik vidroh phir se karna ho ga ap sahamat hai to sear ka res post ko..."
Souvik Nandi, senior advocate representing the centre, submitted: "The disciplinary authority was of the view that... if departmental action is delayed further, then the delinquent constable's conduct will lead to hooliganism."
The judge held that initiating the departmental action without delay cannot form a ground for dispensing with a departmental inquiry in the ordinary manner. "Merely recording a one-liner satisfaction without there being any reasons for such satisfaction does not authorise invoking of special powers under Rule 161(ii). Nothing has been identified in order to show that the satisfaction to dispense with the enquiry is based on objective criteria," he observed.
The RPF was asked to conduct proper disciplinary hearings within eight weeks, given the fact that the constable denied making the comment. The constable, deployed at Purulia under South Eastern Railway before his dismissal, moved the bench of Justice Raja Basu Chowdhury against the order dismissing him from service on May 2, 2018, and the appellate authority order upholding the same on Aug 1.
An assistant commandant of Railway Protection Special Force, M C Tyagi, was shot dead by a constable of his own company while he was deployed on election duty in Meghalaya. The dismissed constable was accused of making certain "objectionable" comments on the incident, which the RPF alleged led to the spread of hatred amongst the ranks. He was suspended on March 28, 2018.
In response to a post on a Facebook group, 'RPF Mutual Transfer', the accused constable allegedly commented: "Is bhai ko RPF taraf se salute ... ab des me sanik vidroh phir se karna ho ga ap sahamat hai to sear ka res post ko..."
Souvik Nandi, senior advocate representing the centre, submitted: "The disciplinary authority was of the view that... if departmental action is delayed further, then the delinquent constable's conduct will lead to hooliganism."
The judge held that initiating the departmental action without delay cannot form a ground for dispensing with a departmental inquiry in the ordinary manner. "Merely recording a one-liner satisfaction without there being any reasons for such satisfaction does not authorise invoking of special powers under Rule 161(ii). Nothing has been identified in order to show that the satisfaction to dispense with the enquiry is based on objective criteria," he observed.
You may also like
Thousands gather in London to support trans rights following UK ruling over definition of woman
No debate on Article 142, decision entirely in court's domain: Ex-SC judge
IPL 2025: 14-Year-Old Prodigy Vaibhav Suryavanshi Smashes His First Ball For A Six During RR Vs LSG Match; Video
Places to Visit in Summer: Make a plan to visit these places in summer..
"Balant attack on judiciary": CPI leader Binoy Viswam on Nishikant Dubey's statement on Supreme Court
