Delhi High Court Denies Relief To DMRC Engineer Accused Of Stealing Ticket Machine, Selling Illegally Recharged Smart Cards
The Delhi High Court has refused to stay disciplinary proceedings against a Junior Engineer working with Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (DMRC) accused of stealing the ticket machine and selling illegally recharged smart cards, causing loss of Rs. 28 lakh to the organisation.
A division bench comprising Justice C Hari Shankar and Justice Ajay Digpaul observed that the attempt of the Junior Engineer, from the very beginning, was only to “stultify the disciplinary proceedings” against him, without allowing them to continue to fruition.
The Court dismissed the plea filed by the Junior Engineer seeking quashing of the disciplinary proceedings as well as to stay the same, with costs of Rs. 25,000 to be paid to the National Defence Fund.
“We, accordingly, dismiss this writ petition with costs of ₹ 25,000/- to be paid to the National Defence Fund within a period of four weeks. Let the costs be paid online, through the NDF portal, and proof thereof be filed with the Registry of this Court immediately thereupon,” the Court said.
The Junior Engineer had challenged dismissal of his plea filed before Central Administrative Tribunal seeking similar reliefs.
An FIR was registered against him in January 2023 alleging that he stole a ticket office machine, including its Central Processing Unit, Card Reader and Crypto, from the premises of the DMRC and installed them at his residence in Greater Noida.
It was alleged that he was issuing illegally recharged smart cards, which were sold for personal gain which resulted in the DMRC suffering a loss of Rs. 28 lakh.
Following this, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him in September 2023. Later, the DMRC rejected his request to engage an advocate as his defence assistant in the disciplinary proceedings, quoting Rule 42(6) of the Delhi Metro Rail Corporation (Conduct, Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 2021.
Dismissing his plea, the Bench agreed with the observation of the Tribunal that the Junior Engineer’s challenge to Rule 42(6) of the 2021 Rules was completely without substance.
The Court said that the challenge was only a means of protracting the disciplinary proceedings. We deprecate this effort, it said.
Observing that his prayer for stay of the disciplinary proceedings pending conclusion of the criminal case was equally without substance, the Court said that the charge against the man was unquestionably grave and thus, no case for staying the disciplinary proceedings against him, pending conclusion of the criminal trial, existed.
Title: VIJENDER KUMAR v. DELHI METRO RAIL CORPORATION & ORS