Back
High Court Of Delhi
NAHAR SINGH - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
L.P.A. 23 of 1985
Decided On : 07/30/1991
General Clauses Act, 1897 - Section 2 give power to an authority to rescind, amend or broke an order passed by it and Section 21 clearly applicable.
Held
Depending on the facts of each case, it is possible to order de novo enquiry if there has been no proper enquiry because of any serious defect, If, for example, principles of natural justice have been violated, then it is open to the disciplinary authority to come to the conclusion that a de novo enquiry should be held.
In the present case the Enquiry Officer had found that the charges against the appellant had been proved. Nevertheless the disciplinary authority came to the conclusion that the summary of allegations which had initially been prepared did not bring out all the relevant facts. In the absence of detailed summary of allegations the appellant must have been placed at a disadvantage. It is on the basis of the summary of allegations that evidence of prosecution witnesses was recorded and opportunity granted to cross-examine them. Such right cannot be effectively exercised if the summary of allegations is vague. Realizing this serious infirmity, the disciplinary authority ordered the re-framing of the summary of allegations and de novo enquiry. We find no illegality have been committed
Apart from the law laid down by the Supreme Court we find that even Section 2 of the General Clauses Act 1897 would give a power to an authority to rescind, amend or broke an order passed by it. What has happened, in effect in the present case is that the order dated 17th January, 1980 whereby the enquiry was initially ordered, has been rescinded and a fresh enquiry ordered. The principles enshrined in Section 21 of the General Clauses Act are clearly applicable and it cannot be said that the disciplinary authority could not act in the manner in which he did. Rather we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the learned Single Judge and in our opinion he rightly came to the conclusion that the disciplinary authority has not acted contrary to law.
( 1 ) THIS is a Letters Patent Appeal whereby the appellant challenges judgment of the learned Single Judge who had dismissed the appellant s writ petition which bad sought to quash the order dated 21st January, 1983 passed by the Deputy Commissioner of Police Delhi setting aside the departmental enquiry against the appellant and directing the abinitio initiation of disciplinary proceedings against the appellant.
( 2 ). On an enquiry conducted by the Vigilance Branch it bad been found that Constable Nahar Singh bad appeared for a list test on May 12, 1978 for selection to lower school course but could not succeed as per the result declared on February 8, 1979. Constable Naharsingh submitted an application on March 31, 1979 to the Additional Commissioner of Police (A), through proper channel requesting that he was given 33 marks for the service record, whereas he deserved for 39 marks as he bad no major or minor punishment to his credit. On examination of his Fauji Misial and character roll by the office of the Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central District, Delhi received from West District Office, it was noticed that all the punishment papers appended in the Pauji Missal had been detached. The constable bad four warnings and bad also been given punishment Drill four times. The index form had also been changed and repaged. Pages 23 to 28 and 37 to 40 missing. Page II containing entry of 15 days punishment Drill in the character roll had been found torn. Constable Nahar Singh was working as main diarist in the West District Office during this period whereas Constable Daya Chand was posted as Fauji Missal Clerk There is a suspicion that the above misconduct has been done by them jointly. With these averments the Disciplinary Authority by an, order dated January 7, 1980 directed under Section 21 of the Delhi Police Act, 1978, that- the departmental enquiry against the petitioner and Constable Daya Chand be initiated. and conducted after observing all usual formalities. In pursuance of this order, summary of allegaticns were served on the petitioner on May 2, 1981. These are :
"it is alleged that Constable Daya Chand No. 657/w was posted as Fauji Missle clerk in the office of DCP West Distt during August 1978 and before 18-4 1979. During this period all the punishment papers appended in the Fauji missle of Const. Nabar Singh No. 455/w bad been detached. The index form bad also been changed and repaged. Page Nos. 23 to 28 and 37 to 40 are missing. Page No. 11 pertaining to the entry of 15 days punishment drill in the character rolls had been found torn. There is a suspicion that this misconduct bad been done by you Const. Daya Chand No. 657/w in connivance with Const. Nahar Singh No. 455/w. "the Enquiry Officer in due course framed a charge on January 5, 1982 to the following effects:
"i, Inspr. Hawa Singh, S. I/west District Lines charge you Const. Daya Chand No. 657/w that while you posted ai Pauji Missal Clerk in ihc office of DCP/west District, all the punishment papers appended in the Pauji Missal of Constable Nabar Singh No. 455/389/w bad been detached during this period. The index form bad been changed and repaged. Page No. 23 to 28 and 37 to 40 are missing. Page No. 11 pertaining to the entry of 15 days. punishment drill in the character rolls bad been found torn. This had been done by you at the instance of Const Nahar Singh No. 455/389/w after Const. Nabar Singb No. 455/389/w had been unsuccessful in the selection test for Lower School Course held OB: 12-5-78 and later on Const. Nahar Singh No. 455/389/w moved an application for re-examination of his character Roll Marks. This misconduct bad been done by you Const. Daya Chand No. 657/w posted as Main diarist in the same office at that time. You, both constables Daya Chand No. 657/w and Const. Nahar singh No. 455/389/w have thus committed gross mis-conduct and remissness, which renders you both liable for under Section 21 of D. P. Act, 1978. "the Enquiry
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
