The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Chairperson of the Council had the authority to adopt CCS(CCA) Rules for conducting the enquiry against the petitioner, and the delay in initiating disciplinary proceedings was adequately explained and did not vitiate the enquiry.

V.K. JAIN, J.

1. The petitioner, who is presently working as Secretary of Central Wakf Council, was initially appointed to the present position on deputation with effect from 3rd July, 1997 and was absorbed as Secretary with effect from 21st August 2000. The petitioner was also appointed as Administrator of Punjab Wakf Board, in addition to his charge as Secretary, Central Wakf Council. The petitioner handed over charge of Punjab Wakf Board to his successor on 1st October, 2002.

2. Vide show cause notice dated 12th August, 2002, the petitioner was informed that Government of India, Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment had received a number of complaints against him with respect to irregular appointments and other irregularities in Punjab Wakf Board, and that the Enquiry Officer appointed by the Government to investigate into those complaints had found the lapses, noted at Serial No.1 to 7 in the show cause notice, in the management of Punjab Wakf Board. He was required to show cause as to why disciplinary action be not initiated against him for committing irregularities mentioned in the notice. The petitioner replied to the show cause on 4th September, 2002. It appears that CBI also received complaint dated 20th June, 2002 against the petitioner from one Mr. Fardeen Iqbal, forwarded to it by Central Vigilance Commission(CVC), and a preliminary enquiry was registered by it on 29th January, 2004. CBI made a recommendation to Ministry of Social Justice and Empowerment on 22nd December, 2004 to initiate major penalty proceedings against the petitioner. Pursuant thereto, a charge sheet dated 5th December, 2008 was issued to the petitioner by the Chairman of Central Wakf Council. The petitioner, instead of giving a parawise reply to the charge sheet, sent a letter dated 17th December, 2008, denying the charges made against him but also seeking to submit pointwise reply to those charges. He sought personal inspection of original files relating to appointment of 19 persons mentioned in the reply and also sought a copy of the enquiry report of the CBI, so that he could submit pointwise reply to the memo of charge. The respondents have not supplied the copy of the CBI report to the petitioner though inspection of the files mentioned in the reply has been given to him.

3. In this Writ Petition the petitioner is seeking quashing of the charge and enquiry proceedings initiated against him.

4. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner has assailed the inquiry proceedings initiated against the petitioner on the following grounds:-

1. The enquiry is sought to be conducted under Rule 14 of CCS/CCA Rules without those Rules having been adopted by Central Wakf Council.

2. The enquiry is sought to be conducted without supplying copy of CBI report to the petitioner.

3. There is delay in instituting the enquiry proceedings.

5. Coming to the first ground, the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Rule 7 of the Central Wakf Council Rules which inter alia provides that the Secretary to the Council shall be appointed by the Chairperson on such terms and conditions as may be fixed by the Council. The contention is that since the terms and conditions for appointment of the Secretary are to be fixed by the Council, the Rules under which disciplinary proceedings can be held against the petitioner have also to be either prescribed or adopted by the Council and since there is no decision taken by the Council to adopt CCS(CCA) Rules for conducting enquiry against the petitioner, the proposed enquiry is bad in law. The learned Additional Solicitor General, who appears for the respondent no.2 and 3, on the other hand, relying upon Rule 13 of the aforesaid Rules has contended that in view of the provisions contained in sub Rule 3 of the aforesaid Rule, the CCS(CCA) Rules, which apply to officers and servants of Central Government would also apply to the persons holding posts in the Council and that woul