Post-dated railway tribunal orders under CBI lens

The Tribunal’s Division Bench comprises a Member Judicial and Member Technical, but CBI sources say the post-dated orders bore the signature of only the Member Technical, Arvind Dhimre. As per law, Division Bench orders have to be signed by both members to be regarded as final.

Dhimre has not denied signing the orders or sending them to Ahmedabad, but refutes allegations of wrongdoing. ‘‘In December last, Member Judicial G R Sharma, who was with me in Nagpur was transferred to Ahmedabad. These orders had been passed by both of us when he was around. But Sharma had not signed them as he was shifted before he could do that. So it was only natural that I had to send them to him to get his signature without which the orders would not be final,’’ he said.

Dhimre sought to explain the June 22 date on the orders by saying: ‘‘It was not the date on which the orders were pronounced, but that on which they were to be pronounced subject to the Judicial Member affixing his signature.’’

However, the CBI thinks Sharma may not have been involved in pronouncing the orders. Asked why the order was sent to Ahmedabad, CBI sources said: ‘‘The attempt, it appears, was to secure the Judicial Member’s signature on the dotted line.’’ But they would not say if this meant a higher-up was involved who may have tried to coerce Sharma into signing.

The Tribunal Chairman, former Judge of Delhi High Court S K Mahajan, says he is not aware of the details. ‘‘All I was told is that CBI has seized some files,’’ he said.

Asked about the June date on the orders, Justice Mahajan said: ‘‘I cannot comment on it without seeing the orders. But as per my information, some orders were passed by the officers, but were not signed by the judicial member. Hence they may have been sent for his signature. But I don’t think there was any corruption.’’

But sources in the Tribunal’s Ahmedabad office counter Dhimre’s claim that he sent the orders to Sharma for signing. Wishing to remain anonymous, they said Sharma had not passed these orders before he left Nagpur; hence, there was no question of signing them.

The sources say what Dhimre is saying now is different from what he himself recorded in the order sheet of the cases.

According to the sheet, copies of which are available with The Indian Express, hearing on the matter was completed last September. The matter was then posted for a final order.

But Sharma’s transfer complicated matters for when an officer hearing a matter is changed before the order is pronounced, the matter has to be reheard by the new appointee. Since no replacement had been named for Sharma, matters were adjourned citing non-availability of the Division Bench.

The adjournments continued till April 26 this year, when the next date of hearing was fixed for June 22. But the judgment was ‘‘pronounced’’ well before that, allegedly by just one Division Bench member.