Inordinate and unexplained delay in the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings can be a ground for quashing the charge sheet and disciplinary proceedings.

( 1 ) THE petitioner is an employee of Delhi Development Authority (In short. the dda ). At the relevant time, the petitioner was a lower division clerk. A charge sheet dated 7th April 1973 was served on the petitioner The statement of imputation pertain to incidents of 1969 and 1970. The allegations against the petitioner, in terms of the statement of imputation on the basis of which article of charge has been framed, are these : "allegation Shri Jai Narain was functioning as Rent Collector, J. J. Scheme, Najafgarh Road, DDA in the year 1969-70. The duty of Shri Jai Narain was only to collect rent or lease money from the allottees. The plot were allotted by the Executive Officer of the J. J. Scheme and the said Shri Jai Narain was not authorised to give possession of plots under the above scheme without competent authority. The said Shri Jai Narain collected money and issued the following receipts :

1. Receipt No. 390/38968 dated 29-7-70 for Rs. 152 in favour of Shri Badri s/o Khaoheroo plot SB] 381 and gave possession of the plot of Shri Basant Lal.

2. Receipt No. 263126286 dated 10-12-69 in favour of Shri Sohan Lal, Plot No. E 1138 and gave possession to him.

3. Receipt No. 342. !34137 dated 1-4-70 for Rs. 50 in favour of Shri Duli Chand, plot No. H/ 150 and gave possession to him.

4. Receipt No. 390138956 dated 22-7-70 for Rs. 104 in favour of Shri Balwant Singh Tenement No. 838 and gave possession to him. The said Shri Jai Narain realised the above amount and issued receipts unauthorisedly for ulterior motive. He thus, contravened Rule 3 of the C. C. S. (Conduct) Rules, 1964. . "the petitioner submitted his reply dated 21st July 1976. The petitioner, inter-alia, took the stand that so far as charge No. 1 is concerned, Sh. S. C. Dixit, the then Officer on Special Duty (JJ) passed certain orders on an application which was received by him through the transit/despatch register of J. J. which has not been made available to him and that the orders of Shri Dixit should be in the records with CBI. or DDA, which record has not been made available to the petitioner. The stand is that receipt was issued under the orders of Sh. Dixit. Regarding charge No. 2, the petitioner stated that he issued the receipt on having seen the previous receipt issued by the Municipal Corporation of Delhi, since the Corporation was dealing with the J. J. Scheme prior to its transfer to DDA and had issued receipt Nos. 982056, 982057 dated 3rd May, 1967 and 150052 dated 13th January 1968 in the name of Digh Ram. He further, took the stand that receipt No. 263126286 dated 10th December, 1969 has been issued by him in the name of Digh Ram and not Sohan Lal. Regarding receipt No. 342! 34137 dated 1st April, 1970 in favour of Duli Chand. , petitioner ^ has stated that Duli Chand is the actual allottee of plot vide. allotment letter No. 2147in dated 3rd November, 1965 arid there is no case as such of issuance of receipt unauthorisedly or for ulterior motive. Receipt No. 390138956 dated 22nd July. 1970 was stated to have been issued under the written orders of Sh. Ram Dhir Singh Dahiya, the then Rent Supervisor under whom petitioner was stated to be working and written orders of Sh. Dahiya were stated to be available in original with CBI. The delay in filing reply to charge sheet is stated to have occurred on account of non supply of documents by the DDA to the petitioner.

( 2 ) SINCE the enquiry did not make any head way, the petitioner filed this petition in February 1994, inter alia, seeking quashing of the charge-sheet and consequent departmental proceedings on the main "round of undue and inordinate delay in conclusion of the departmental proceedings.

( 3 ) IT also seems dear from the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the DDA that there has been undue and. inordinate delay in the conclusion of the departmental enauiry for no fault of the petitioner. No satisfactory explanation is coming forth on record for this delay. The incident perta