Justice Prevails

EVENTHOUGH DELAYED JUSTICE PREVAILS
Ravichandran, Zonal President AILRSA, South Zone

AILRSA appreciates the LP Sri.S.Gurumurhty/KZJ who relentlessly has taken the fight for justice to ensure safety to the highest level and ultimately appreciated for his stance on the issue.
INCIDENT

On 23.08.2006, LP/Goods Sri. S.Gurumurthy was ordered to work Trian No: BCN from KZJ. At Potkapalle station, he came to know that the destination of the train was PandarPavani. As he had no valid LR in that section, he informed the same to the SCOR through DySS/Kolnur and later at Ramagundam and also requested for relief at BPA which was also arranged. But the TLC on duty treated it as his prestige issue, prevented the relief arrangement at BPA and further insisted the LP to work the train to nthe destination despite the fact that the LP had no valid LR in the Manikgarh-PandarPavani section. The LP refused and hence the train was detained at Manikgarh.
SUSPENSION, CHARGE SHEET AND APPEALS

SrDEE/SC placed the LP under suspension from 23.08.2006 for his refusal to work the train. After 5 days, the suspension was revoked on 28.08.2006.
On 29.08.2006, ADEE/SC issued a charge memo alleging that the LP should have worked the train up to the destination since the ALP on duty was having valid LR on that section.
The LP asserted in his reply to the charge memo that he did not violate any rule but adhered to the rules and the adamant behavior of the authorities is the root cause of the detention.
The Disciplinary Authority however found him guilty of the charge and imposed a punishment of withholding increment for 35 months.
The LP appealed to SrDEE/SC.
The Appellate Authority had dismissed the appeal and confirmed the punishment.
The LP preferred revision to ADRM.
The Revisional Authority dismissed the same.
COURT

The LP filed a case in CAT/Hyderabad. The Administration in their reply has admitted that i) the LP was not informed about the destination while signing ON ii) the LP has not worked train in the Manikgarh-PandarPavani section for over 3 months prior to 23.08.2006.
But they pleaded that the LP could have worked the train with the assistance of the ALP who had valid LR and also asserted that the ALP comes under the definition of qualified railway servant referred to in GR 3.78.4.
The LP filed a rejoinder in which he denied the alleged advice given by TLC to obtain the services of ALP and even it is given, it is not within the ambit of rules and against safety.
JUDGEMENT

The Hon’ble Justice in his judgement has noted that the ALP is not qualified to perform the duties of a LP. He agreed with the contention of the LP through his counsel that the qualified competent railway servant referred to in GR 3.78.4 means another qualified LP having knowledge in the section and not the ALP. Since the driving of a train comes under safety category, the safety rules have to be strictly followed.
Hence, the punishment imposed by the Disciplinary Authority, confirmed by the Appellate Authority and the Revisional Authority was set aside.

THUS EVENTHOUGH DELAYED, JUSTICE PREVAILED.
REF: O.A.No.21 OF 2008 S.Gurumurthy vs Union of India dated 14.07.2009.