No official Railway Board PDF has been traced for this entry yet. The text below was read from the document held in the library.
| Date | 2019-09-21 |
|---|---|
| Type | Corrigendum |
| Topic | ticket-checking |
| Currency | Historical — likely superseded |
A charge memorandum was issued on 15.09.2019 alleging that UTS tickets
Dear Sir, Points for Clarification under the Indian Railway Disciplinary and Appeal (D&A) Rules: 1. Is it permissible under the D&A Rules to issue a corrigendum modifying the charge sheet misconduct date from 21.06.2019 to 11.09.2019 after the inquiry process has been completed in SER, the penalty imposed by the Disciplinary Authority (DA) Dy.CEnHM/Mech/SER, and the punishment upheld by the Appellate Authority CEnHM/Mech/SER, while the revision application ( along with seven reminders ) is still pending before the Revision Authority i.e GM/SER? 2. Is it permissible for a Disciplinary Authority (DA) Sr.DCM/MYS to keep an employee under suspension for 226 days without any approved extension? 3. Can a DA issue a Minor Charge Memorandum (SF-11) during the suspension period of the employee? 4. If a DA keeps an employee under suspension for 226 days without any approved extension and imposes two Minor Penalties (SF-11), should the suspension period be treated as duty or Leave Without Pay as per the D&A Rules? 5. Is it permissible under the D&A Rules for a DA to issue a Charge Memorandum (SF-5) based solely on suspicious grounds? 6. Can an Inquiry Officer proceed with an inquiry process against an employee when the charge sheet is issued based on suspicious grounds? 7. What is the prescribed time limit under the D&A Rules for recommending the issuance of a Charge Memorandum after a Vigilance Inspector identifies misconduct? Actions by the Vigilance Inspector and Related Events: 1. First Charge Memorandum issued by Sr.DCM/MYS : served without complete RUD’s on 15.09.2019. • A charge memorandum was issued on 15.09.2019 alleging that UTS tickets were found at the SBC TC office during a Vigilance check on 21.09.2019. • The DA made four allegations: misuse of UTS tickets, printing counterfeit tickets, issuing them to passengers, and benefiting financially from passengers. • During the inquiry process, it was established that: • The ticket issuance time, your duty time, and the passenger travel time did not match. • The ticket numbers were inserted by someone else, marked as “last entry,” and the handwriting is completely different. • The same UTS ticket numbers were recorded in the Ticket Collect Register for the same train, indicating counterfeit tickets were circulating in SWR.but the IO provided the all charges blindly and the DA imposed the NIP as two stages down. 2. Actions by the Vigilance Inspector: • The Vigilance Inspector threatened you with a penalty (two years’ increment reduction) and advised against appealing the punishment. Despite this, I approached the Appellate and Revision Authorities because I did not commit the alleged misconduct. 3. Second Charge Memorandum issued by Dy.CCM/PS/SER: • The same Vigilance Inspector recommended another charge memorandum on 10.12.2024, alleging that tickets dated 21.09.2019 were collected from a “source of information” and deemed suspicious. • Notable details: • The first charge memorandum involved tickets dated 11.09.2019 and 13.09.2019. • The second charge memorandum involved tickets dated 21.09.2019. • On 29.09.2019, the Vigilance Inspector recorded my statement about five counterfeit UTS tickets dated 21.09.2019, but these tickets were not included in either charge memorandum. • The Vigilance Inspector allegedly visited my hometown on 29.09.2019 (while I was on duty), he blackmailed me for a bribe, and is now threatening to recommend yet another charge memorandum against me. It is important to note that, in the letter addressed by the APO/SER Reference from Sr.DCM/Mysore, to the Disciplinary Authority/SER (DA), it is explicitly mentioned: “I, Sri K. Vinod Kumar, while working as Commercial Supervisor at Nanjangud Town Railway Station under Mysuru Division, was engaged in fraudulent usage of UTS tickets and was caught red-handed during a preventive check conducted by the Vigilance Branch of South Western Railway.” This statement is completely false and does not reflect the actual fact
Extract shown above; the full text is available in the search app.
Open this circular in the search app · Search all 4,025 documents