IMPORTANT POINT
In respect of departmental proceedings, initiated or sought to be initiated by Government against its employee, a person not even remotely connected with those proceedings cannot challenge any aspect of such departmental proceedings.

ORDER

Dr. U.N. Biswas, IPS, who is the Joint Director, CBI, Calcutta was issued a charge-sheet for departmental action. The article of charge read as follows:-

"Dr. U.N. Biswas, IPS (WB:68) while posted as joint Director (East) CBI, Calcutta and during the course of supervision of AHD cases of Bihar failed to maintain absolute devotion to duty and committed gross misconduct inasmuch as he acted irresponsibly and in excess of his authority in a manner unbecoming of a manager of the All India Services in that:

On 29/20.7.1997, he on his own and without prior approval and authorisation from the Director, CBI and without justification and authority and in violation of law for calling army help in aid of civil authority had initiated and pursued steps for deployment of the army in the matter of execution of Non-bailable warrant issued by the Special Court against Shri Laloo Prasad Yadav. Ex. Chief Minister of Bihar, who figured as accused in CBI case No. RC-20(A)/96-PAT. In pursuance of his illegal orders SP, CBI, AHD Patna, Shri VSK Kaumudi submitted a written requisition to the local army authorities on 30.7.1997 morning for deployment of army personnel for execution of non-bailable warrant of arrest against Shri Laloo Prasad Yadav at Patna. This direction given by Dr. U.N. Biswas to his subordinate authorities was illegal and reflected lack of knowledge and was an exercise in excess of his authority and he thereby displayed lack of devotion to duty and contravened the provisions of Rule 3(1) of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968.

2. The statement of imputation in support of article of charge was as follows:-

"That Dr. U.N. Biswas, IPS (WB.68) Joint Director (East), C.B.I., Calcutta since 25.7.1994 and 30.7.1997 while posted and functioning as such. It was his duty to act as per laid down rules and procedures and do all important official business by keeping his superior officers informed as per existing instructions in this regard, being a member of the disciplined force but he failed to do so as much as:-

"That Dr. U.N. Biswas, IPS (WB:68) Joint Director (East), CBI, Calcutta who was posted since 25-7-1994 as JD (East) with HQ at Calcutta and on 30.7.1997in order to execute Non-bailable Warrant against Shri Laloo Prasad Yadav, Ex. Chief Minister against whom charge sheet had been filed by the CBI instructed Shri V.S.K. Kaumudi, SP, AHD, Patna and Rakesh Kumar, Standing Counsel to seek help of the army which was not at all warranted and contrary to the law laid down for use of armed forces in aid to civil authorities, the execution of Non-bailable Warrant is not a purpose for which army assistance can be called. Moreover, this was done despite DTG, AHD, Patna, Shri R.N. Kaul s verbal request to him asking not to call the army in such manner without consulting the Director, CBI to which Dr. U.N. Biswas did not pay heed and pursued for the steps for requisitioning the army unauthorised and thereby displayed lack of knowledge, insubordination and committed misconduct in violation of Rule 3(1) of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968."

3. Dr. Biswas approached the Central Administrative Tribunal for quashing the article of the charge but the petition was dismissed. He then approached the High Court by a writ petition which was allowed by the High Court by its impugned judgment dated 29.4.1998 and the chargesheet issued to him was quashed.

4. The present petitioner before us Mr. Rajnit Prasad is a practising Advocate at Patna who was not a party either before the Central Administrative Tribunal or before the High Court. By order dated 26.10.98 notice was directed to be issued to the respondent only on the question of "locus standi" of the petitioner.

5. The background of the case in which the charge-sheet was issued to Dr. Biswas for departmental proceedings has been set out in the special leave petition. It is contended that having regard to the nature of the case, he being a member of the public, can file the prese