IMPORTANT POINT
Ordinarily no writ lies against a charge-sheet or show cause notice unless it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some reason wholly illegal.

Headnote:SERVICE LAW - Constitution of India - Article 226 - No writ petition lies against a charge-sheet or show cause - Respondent was appointed as Clerk in Postal Dept. in 1965 on basis of marks obtained in SSLC Examination - SSLC certificate indicated that respondent belonged to “Konda Kapu” community which was Scheduled Tribe Community in State of A.P. - Respondent thereafter took promotion to post of UDC and next higher post i.e. LSG cadre against post reserved for Scheduled Tribe category - Show cause notice was issued in 1994 that he had obtained employment on forged caste certificate - In reply respondent admitted that he did not belong to “Konda Kapu” community but belonged to Kapu community which was not Scheduled Tribe Community - Post Master General directed respondent to be treated as `OC’ Community - Collector ordered cancellation of caste certificate of respondent and requested Chief Post Master General to take action against respondent - Charge-memo was issued - Instead of replying charge-memo respondent filed OA which was disposed of with direction to applicant to submit reply to charge-memo - Respondent filed writ petition and High Court allowed writ - Appeal - High Court was not justified in allowing Writ Petition - Mere charge-sheet or show cause does not give rise to any cause of action - Impugned judgment was liable to be set aside.
       Held : It is well settled by a series of decisions of this Court that ordinarily no writ lies against a charge sheet or show-cause notice vide Executive Engineer, Bihar State Housing Board vs. Ramdesh Kumar Singh and others JT 1995 (8) SC 331, Special Director and another vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and another AIR 2004 SC 1467, Ulagappa and others vs. Divisional Commissioner, Mysore and others 2001(10) SCC 639, State of U.P. vs. Brahm Datt Sharma and another AIR 1987 SC 943 etc.(Para 13)
       The reason why ordinarily a writ petition should not be entertained against a mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet is that at that stage the writ petition may be held to be premature. A mere charge-sheet or show-cause notice does not give rise to any cause of action, because it does not amount to an adverse order which affects the rights of any party unless the same has been issued by a person having no jurisdiction to do so. It is quite possible that after considering the reply to the show-cause notice or after holding an enquiry the authority concerned may drop the proceedings and/or hold that the charges are not established. It is well settled that a writ lies when some right of any party is infringed. A mere show-cause notice or charge-sheet does not infringe the right of any one. It is only when a final order imposing some punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, that the said party can be said to have any grievance.(Para 14)
       Writ jurisdiction is discretionary jurisdiction and hence such discretion under Article 226 should not ordinarily be exercised by quashing a show-cause notice or charge sheet.(Para 15)
       No doubt, in some very rare and exceptional cases the High Court can quash a charge-sheet or show-cause notice if it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some other reason if it is wholly illegal. However, ordinarily the High Court should not interfere in such a matter.(Para 16)
       For the foregoing reasons, we are of the opinion that the impugned judgment of the High Court is not correct and the same is set aside. We fully agree with the view taken by the Central Administrative Tribunal vide its order dated 15.3.2004. The respondent is now directed to submit his reply to the Charge Memo dated 23.12.2003 within three weeks from today and the authority concerned should decide the same expeditiously in accordance with law, and thereafter take appropriate legal action in pursuance of the said decision, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the respondent.(Para 21)

JUDGMENT

Markandey Katju, J. - Leave granted.

2. This appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment and order dated 22.3.2006 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition No. 7409 of 2004.

3. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

4. The respondent was initially appointed as a Clerk in the Postal Department of the Union of India on 30.11.1965 on the basis of the marks obtained by him in the SSLC Examination. The SSLC certificate of the respondent indicated that he belongs to the Konda Kapu community which is admittedly a Scheduled Tribe community in the State of Andhra Pradesh.

5. Thereafter the respondent appeared for a departmental test for promotion to the post of Upper Division Clerk against a post reserved for the Scheduled Tribe community, and the respondent was promoted as an Upper Division Clerk in Scheduled Tribe category. His promotion order specifically stated that he has been promoted as an Upper Division Clerk under Scheduled Tribe category vide promotion order dated 27.12.1976. Thereafter, in 1987, he was further promoted to the next higher post, i.e. LSG cadre, again on a post reserved for Scheduled Tribe category.

6. On 28.11.1994, a show-cause notice was issued to the respondent to show cause as to whether he obtained employment on forged caste certificate. In reply to the said show-cause notice, the respondent admitted that he does not belong to Konda Kapu community, but he belongs to Kapu community which is not a Scheduled Tribe community. The respondent in reply to the show-cause notice also stated that it was wrongly mentioned in the SSC register that he belongs to Konda Kapu community on the basis of a declaration given by his illiterate father who got the respondent admitted in school when he was 11 years old.

7. By order dated 3.1.1995, the Assistant Post Master General directed that the respondent be treated as OC community and accordingly an alteration was made in the respondents Service Book stating that he belongs to OC community.

8. On 11.7.1997, the competent authority i.e. Collector of Hyderabad District passed an order stating that the respondent obtained an ST caste certificate from the Mandal Revenue Officer although he does not belong to Konda Kapu community, but he belongs to Kapu community, which is not a Scheduled Tribe community. Hence, the Collector ordered cancellation of the caste certificate of the respondent and requested the Chief Post Master General, A.P. Circle to take action against the respondent vide order dated 11.7.1997.

9. Aggrieved against that order, the respondent filed an appeal before the State Government which was disposed of on 17.2.2001 holding that the respondent does not belong to Scheduled Tribe community and he cannot be considered as such, and the Postal Department may take appropriate disciplinary action against the respondent.

10. Consequently a Charge Memo dated 23.12.2003 was issued to the respondent framing the following charges against him:

"That he, while working as T/S Clerk in the Secunderabad Postal Division, appeared for the examination held on 19.9.76 for promotion to UDC against a post reserved for ST community and subsequently he was also promoted to LSG Cadre based on the said reservation. However, as per G.O. Ms No. 28 dated 17.02.2001 the Government of A.P. declared that Sri K. Satyanarayana does not belong to Konda Kapu as declared by him and as such not entitled for the reservation under the ST category.

That Shri K. Satyanarayana availed reservation against ST in the promotional post though he does not belong to the said category and as such failed to maintain absolute integrity and acted in a manner unbecoming of a government servant contravening the provisions of Rule 3(1) (i) & (iii) of the CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964. The statement of imputations gives the details of the reservation availed by the petitioner during his service."

11. Instead of replying to the aforesaid Charge Memo, the respondent filed an O

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2006 Supreme(SC) 1160

IMPORTANT POINTOrdinarily no writ lies against a charge-sheet or show cause notice unless it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some reason wholly illegal.

Cases Referred (5)

IMPORTANT POINT
Ordinarily no writ lies against a charge-sheet or show cause notice unless it is found to be wholly without jurisdiction or for some reason wholly illegal.