I requested for inspection of a file, pertaining to my disputed period of service from 13.5.89 to 25.4.90.
Facts of the case were: On recovery from sickness, I submitted FIT CERTIFICATE, issued by the Divl. Med. Officer on 12.5.89 evening and resumed duty from 13.5.89 morning. On and from 16.5.89 afternoon, I was, illegally, restrained from doing my legitimate duty on verbal orders recorded in the duty diary, without assigning any reason. Repeated verbal and written requests, for duty, fell on deaf ears.
On the matter being taken up by the Union, period was treated as "leave due", and meager payment made, accordingly, consuming my leave. My protest against the anarchic action, brought no result. I filed a petition. The learned (!) judge, in 2001 passed order for reconsideration of the case. It was again rejected by the DRM. Next petition was declared time barred in 2005.
In the petition, the DRM had said on oath that the petitioner, after depositing the certificate, had absconded. DRM neither accepted nor denied receipt of various applications of the petitioner, for continuing duty.
Order giving duty, dated 19.4.90, did not mention of absconding. I was not taken up for unauthorised absence neither I was sent for medical examination, as required under Railway rules.
To my first request for inspection of the file, I was told that the record being old was not available, to second, it was an irrelevant reply offering to inspect some other files. In the CIC, it was argued that the file had been weeded out as per instructions for maintaining old records.
The CIC heard me and ordered to open the file for inspection or supply a copy of instruction under which weeding was done.
My contention that the file was alive till 2005 and was likely to be required in future. As such, it should not have been weeded out, according to those instructions.
Now, how should I frame questions, to prove that the file is alive and get it opened for inspection? Can I approach the CIC to reopen the case or file a fresh application to the CPIO/NR/LKO again? If so, how should I frame questions?
Leaving aside the inspection part, the main issue is to prove that you were not absconding but were restrained from performing duty . I don't think quotting any of the verbal orders will be of any use. Firstly you have to get copy of the orders recorded in the duty diary. Unless you prove with documentary evidence that you were restrained from doing duty nothing will solve your problem. You have to prove that the affidavit of DRM was false.
Only persons working in Government will know how difficult it is to take action against a Government servant. They are so well protected under the various service rules! Nowadays RTI has come as one more layer of protection.