RBE No.150/1991 : Disciplinary Action – Missing person.
RBE No.150/1991 : Disciplinary Action – Missing person.
No.E(D&A)91 RG6-41, dated 22.08.1991
Sub: Cancellation of penalty of removal from service imposed on charge of un-authorized absence where it later transpires that the case is one of ‘genuine missing’ and grant of consequent benefits to the missing person ’s family.
Some cases have come to notice where Railway servants who were missing and whose whereabouts were not known to their family were removed from service for un-authorized absence. It has been represented by the NFIR in PNM meeting with Railway Board that initiation of disciplinary action in such cases where even the police after all-out efforts have not been able to trace the employee, is not justified since they are to be presumed as dead under Section 108 of the Indian Evidence Act. The NFIR also represented that in such cases, the disciplinary action / punishment should be annulled and the families be granted pension and their request for compassionate appointment to wards etc. to which they would have been entitled but for the disciplinary action be also considered.
2. The Board have considered the matter and it is clarified that in cases of the type mentioned above where it is established that the railway employee was really missing and not un-authorizedly absent, the disciplinary action should be treated as initiated on invalid premises and the on-going disciplinary action or the punishment order should be annulled. While the annulment of on-going disciplinary proceedings in such cases may be made by the disciplinary authority, in the cases of punishment orders already issued, the annulment may be made by the appellate / revisionary authority, as the case may be, for this purpose. It is not necessary to follow any ‘Revision’ or ‘Review’ procedure since the charges / punishment are obviously based on invalid premises. After dropping of the disciplinary action and annulment of the punishment of removal, as the case may be, the relevant benefits like grant of leave encashment, salary dues, retirement benefits, etc. may be extended as outlined in Board’s letter No.F(E)III/86/PN1/17, dated 19.09.1986.
3. In the cases of aforesaid type, the question of giving compassionate appointments to wards may also be considered after a period of 7 years / 3 years as provided in item (iii) of para 1 of Board’s letter No.E(NG)III/78/RC1/1, dated 07.04.1983.
Download Railway Board Circular RBE No. 150/1991
Forward reference⇒RBE No.
Sir when i got this official letter
Good question , instead of asking when this letter came, santhosh you should feel happy a number of people were missing in Railways as we know that employer does not know whereabouts of an employer with knowledge they might intiate disciplinary charge against missing Railway Employee to stop this act, in the year 1991 this letter came into existence.
Please help me 8949233866.meri koi ni sun rha ajmer DRm office me
Sir Sri Darla Srinivasarao keyman Bapaptla while working under the control of PWI was missing from 2nd December 2009. His wife applied for widowed family pension and CG appointment to her son with Police FIR police non traceable certificate copy to Sr DPO BZA after a lapse of 9yrs quoting the circular no 150/1991.But Sr DPO BZA did not consider the circular and closed the case as the employee was removed from the service by DAR proceedings. So please advise in this regard
Thanks for visiting https://railwayrule.com
It is not clear from your query (i) date of FIR, (ii) date of removal, (iii) whether the wife of missing person participated in the inquiry proceedings or the fact of missing person was brought to the notice of Inquiry Officer, (iv) date of report ‘non-traceable’ received from Police, (v) date of submission of this report to Sr.DPO/BZA, and (vi) date of rejection by Sr.DPO for family pension & CG appointment.
In absence of above, we are unable to tender any advice.
Please stay connected https://railwayrule.com with for more updates.
Sir with reference to the above remarks I am furnishing the following details. My husband Darla Srinivasarao keyman Bapatla was missing from 2nd December 2009. I filed FIR on 15/12/2009 in VIJAYAWADA police station(case no 620 /2009). I informed about my husband’s disappearance to the PWI /Bapatla through the gang unit employees. The ADEN/BPP conducted DAR enquiry on 22/12/2011 as per P/1/28/DAR/Bpp/DSR/22/12/2011 and removed from service with effect from 31/12/2011 with serving notice to me and obtained acknowledgement for SF 5 charge sheet. The police department gave non traceable certificate that my husband Darla Srinivasarao was not traceable till 03/09/2011. So I waited another seven years as per rule and applied for widowed family pension and CG appointment to my son on 22 /11 /2018 enclosing the FIR and police certificate, affidavit of family members. The Senior Divisional personnel officer Vijayawada did not responded. So I approached pensioner’s portal seeking resolution. Then Sr Divisional personnel officer Vijayawada scrly replied that my husband Darla Srinivasarao was removed from service on 31/12/2011 and I am not eligible for widowed family pension and CG appointment to my son. Till that time I was not aware of my husband’s removal. So I again approached through CPGRAMS Portal quoting the RBE_NO 150/1991 that I am eligible for Family pension and other benefits even though my husband was removed from service. I clearly explained the RBE_No 150/1991 circular and pleading to implement the circular. But the Sr Divisional personnel officer Vijayawada not replied whether this circular is implied or not and stated that I am not eligible for Family pension or retirement benefits as my husband was removed from service. As per the RBE_No 150/1991 my husband’s penalty of removal should be treated as invalid and disciplinary action should be annulled and the retirement benefits should be extended. So I humbly request you to advise me and give justification to my problem and help my family. Thanking you sir Darla Jayalakshmi cell no 9966387670
Thanks for visiting https://railwayrule.com
Your case is badly time-barred.
Make an exhaustive representation addressing to concerned GM referring RBE No. 150/1991. If reply received, is not acceptable to you, file OA in the CAT within 01 year. If no reply is received within 06 months, OA in CAT may be filed for redressal.
Please stay connected with https://railwayrule.com for regular updates.
Hello Sir,
CAT single bench Judge ordered to Railway to provide all the benifits to the missing person’s wife, however, railway denied to provide any benifits to the missing person family. Now the case is still pending in CAT with Duble bench Judge. Railway now disclosed that person was removal from service. However, no information was provided to the family ever.
Please suggest what else we can do. that case is pending since 2014. However, incident was happed 1991.