1. Disciplinary proceedings — Issuance of charge-sheet — Challenge to quash charge-sheet before filing reply. (Para 4 )
Back
Next 
1993 Supreme(SC) 877
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.S.Anand : J.S.Verma
Union Of India
Versus
Ashok Kacker
Case No. : 5208 of 1993
Date of Decision : 9/27/93
A tribunal should not quash a charge-sheet at a premature stage before the employee has submitted a reply and the disciplinary authority has had an opportunity to decide on the matter.
Headnote:(A) Service Law - Disciplinary Proceedings - Quashing of Charge-sheet - Challenge to a charge-sheet at a premature stage, before the employee has submitted a reply, is not maintainable - The appropriate course for the employee is to file a reply to the charge-sheet and invite the decision of the disciplinary authority before seeking judicial intervention - Tribunals should not entertain applications for quashing charge-sheets at such a preliminary stage. (Para 4)
Facts of the case:
An employee approached a tribunal to quash a charge-sheet issued against him, even before submitting a reply to the said charge-sheet. The tribunal entertained the application and quashed the charge-sheet. The matter was subsequently appealed before the higher court.
Findings of Court:
The tribunal entertained the application at a premature stage. The employee has a full opportunity to reply to the charge-sheet and raise all available grounds, including those regarding the validity of the basis for initiating proceedings, before the disciplinary authority.
Issues: Whether a tribunal is justified in quashing a charge-sheet before the employee has submitted a reply to the disciplinary authority.
Ratio Decidendi: A charge-sheet should not be quashed by a tribunal at a premature stage; the employee must first submit a reply and allow the disciplinary authority to decide on the matter before seeking judicial review.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Charge-sheet based on previously closed matters — Request for remittal to consider other grounds for quashing. (Para 3 )
3. Application to quash charge-sheet filed prematurely before submitting reply — Opportunity available to raise all grounds before disciplinary authority. (Para 4 )
4. Tribunals should not entertain applications to quash charge-sheets at a premature stage before the respondent has filed a reply to the charges. (Para 4 )
5. Appeal allowed — Order quashing charge-sheet set aside — Respondent's application dismissed. (Para 5 )
6. At what stage is an application to quash a charge-sheet considered premature?
An application is premature when the respondent has not yet submitted a reply to the charge-sheet and approaches the tribunal before the disciplinary authority has had the opportunity to decide on the response. (Para 4 )
7. What is the proper procedure for a respondent to challenge the basis of a charge-sheet?
The respondent should file a reply to the charge-sheet, raising all available points and grounds, and then invite the decision of the disciplinary authority on those submissions. (Para 4 )
(1) LEAVE granted.
(2) HEARD on merits.
(3) SHRI G. Ramaswamy, learned counsel for the respondent does not support the tribunals order for the reasons given therein in view of the decisions of this Court in Union of India v. A.N. Saxena and Union of India v. K.K. Dhawan. However, Shri Ramaswamy contended that the respondent has raised several other grounds before the tribunal for quashing the charge-sheet issued to the respondent, which have not been considered by the tribunal in view of the fact that the tribunal quashed the charge-sheet on the only ground given therein. On this basis, Shri Ramaswamy submitted that it would be appropriate to remit the matter to the tribunal for a fresh decision on the other points urged on behalf of the respondent (applicant before the tribunal). Shri Ramaswamy strenuously urged that the basis on which the charge-sheet has been issued to the respondent is not available for initiating the disciplinary proceedings inasmuch as the matter on the basis of those facts had earlier been closed by the Department after full examination. He submits that for this reason initiation of disciplinary enquiry on that basis is no longer permissible.
(4) ADMITTEDLY, the respondent has not yet submitted his reply to the charge- sheet and the respondent rushed to the central Administrative tribunal merely on the information that a charge-sheet to this effect was to be issued to him. The Tribunal entertained the respondents application at that premature stage and quashed the charge-sheet issued during the pendency of the matter before the Tribunal on a ground which even the learned counsel for the respondent made no attempt to support. The respondent has the full opportunity to reply to the charge-sheet and to raise all the points available to him including those which are now urged on his behalf by learned counsel for the respondent. In our opinion, this was not the stage at which the tribunal ought to have entertained such an application for quashing the charge-sheet and the appropriate course for the respondent to adopt is to file his reply to the charge-sheet and invite the decision of the disciplinary authority thereon. This being the stage at which the respondent had rushed to the tribunal, we do not consider it necessary to require the tribunal at this stage to examine any other point which may be available to the respondent or which may have been raised by him.
(5) CONSEQUENTLY, the appeal is allowed. The impugned order of the tribunal quashing the charge-sheet is set aside resulting in dismissal of the respondents application made before the tribunal. No costs.
