Back
RAJIV SHAKDHER, JASMEET SINGH
Sanjeev Ghei – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Rajiv Shakdher, J. - CM aPPL. 14775/2022
1. allowed, subject to just exceptions.
W.P.(C) 4968/2022
CM aPPL 14774/2022[application filed on behalf of the petitioner seeking interim relief]
CM aPPL. 14776/2022[application filed on behalf of the petitioner for filing additional documents]
2. Issue notice.
3. Ms Nidhi Raman accepts notice on behalf of respondent nos.1 and 2
3.1. In view of the directions that we intend to pass, notice need not issue to respondent no.3.
4. With the consent of the parties, the writ petition is taken up for hearing and final disposal, at this stage itself.
5. This writ petition is directed against an interlocutory order dated 23.02.2022, passed by the Central administrative Tribunal [in short 'Tribunal'] in Oa No.2/2022 and Ma Nos.399/2022 and 400/2022, preferred in the said O.a.
6. Mr a.K. Bhardwaj, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, says that the petitioner had approached the Tribunal by way of Ma No.399/2022 seeking a stay on the charge memo dated 31.12.2014. It is the contention of Mr Bhardwaj that this charge memo stands withdrawn; an aspect which the Tribunal has also noted in its order dated 23.02.2022.
6.1. In support of this plea i.e., that
The court emphasized the importance of appreciating the relief sought by the petitioner and directed the Tribunal to hear arguments afresh.
The court emphasized the need for a thorough judicial review of the Tribunal's order regarding disciplinary proceedings, asserting that it must assess the implications of a withdrawn charge memo.
The withdrawal of a charge memo does not necessarily nullify the proceedings, and pendency of disciplinary proceedings can be a valid reason for denying promotion.
Belated fresh charge memo superseding earlier one without reasons for delay, issued pre-retirement for same misconduct, is impermissible and quashable.
Disciplinary proceedings may continue only with proper justification, even after compulsory retirement, pending Tribunal's assessment of the circumstances.
Issuing a second charge memo while a criminal case is pending violates principles of natural justice and is impermissible.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that once disciplinary proceedings are dropped without giving any reason, a proceeding cannot be re-initiated, as per the circular dated 05.07.1979....
The Court held that service of a charge memo, under applicable rules, must follow prescribed methods, and evading such protocols does not invalidate disciplinary proceedings against a public servant.
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
