IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Rajiv Shakdher, Talwant Singh, JJ.
Dinesh Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 13259 of 2019
Decided On : 11-02-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. inquiry report received; direction for timely decision. (Para 1) |
| 2. closure of writ petition and consignment of records. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6) |
JUDGMENT
[Court hearing convened via video-conferencing on account of COVID-19]
Rajiv Shakdher, J. (Oral)
CM APPL. 3175/2022
1. On the previous date i.e., 19.01.2022, we had passed the following order in the above-captioned application :
"1. Mr. A.S. Singh, who appears on behalf of the petitioner/applicant, says that since the inquiry officer has submitted the inquiry report, albeit on 30.03.2021, all that the petitioner seeks, in the form of direction, is that the disciplinary authority should take a decision, one way or another, within the stipulated timeframe.
2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.08.2019, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short the "Tribunal"] in O.A. No.2772/2017, wherein the operative directions issued were that the inquiry should be completed within a period of six months.
3. Given this position, we are prima facie of the view that a direction can be issued to the disciplinary authority to take a decision in the matter within a stipulated timeframe, with liberty to the petitioner to assail the decision of the disciplinary authority, if it is adverse to his interest based on the grounds raised in the O.A., as also the grounds taken in the writ petition.
4. Mr. Hanu Bhaskar, who appears on behalf of the respondents, says that he will take instructions in the matter.
4.1. Mr. Singh says that he will do likewise.
5. List the matter on 11.02.2022.
6. In the meanwhile, Mr. Singh will furnish a copy of the case papers, including the above-captioned application to Mr. Bhaskar during the course of the day, albeit, via e-mail."
2. Pursuant to the aforementioned order, Mr. Hanu Bhaskar, who appears on behalf of the respondents, has reverted with instructions.
2.1. Mr. Bhaskar says that the final decision will be taken by the disciplinary authority qua the petitioner, within the next six months commencing from today.
2.2. The statement of Mr Bhaskar is taken on record.
3. The above-captioned application is, thus, disposed of, in view of the statement made by Mr Bhaskar above. However, it would be open to the petitioner to raise any objections vis-a'-vis the final decision taken by the disciplinary authority, including the objection with regard to delay, albeit, as per law.
W.P.(C) 13259/2019 & CM APPL.53914/2019[Application filed on behalf of the petitioner for interim relief]
4. Both Mr R.V. Sinha, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr Bhaskar say that the writ petition and the pending application can be closed, having regard to the order passed in CM No.3175/2022.
4.1. It is ordered accordingly.
5. Resultantly, the date fixed in the matter i.e., 09.05.2022 shall stand cancelled.
6. The case file shall stand consigned to record.
The court reinforces the responsibility of disciplinary authorities to make timely decisions on inquiries, ensuring procedural fairness for affected parties.
The disciplinary authority must make a timely decision, and the petitioner has the right to challenge the decision if adverse.
Disciplinary proceedings may continue only with proper justification, even after compulsory retirement, pending Tribunal's assessment of the circumstances.
The court emphasized the necessity for timely resolution of tribunal applications to facilitate uninterrupted disciplinary proceedings and uphold the integrity of the process.
The period of limitation for disciplinary proceedings was suspended during the COVID-19 pandemic, as per the Supreme Court's order dated January 10, 2022, and the disciplinary authority had 90 days f....
The court cannot interfere with pending tribunal matters and emphasizes timely adjudication by the administrative tribunal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the application for leave to pass final order in the disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner was filed in a sheer illegal, arbitrary, ....
The court emphasized adherence to judicial precedents in administrative inquiries and recognized a respondent's right to pursue legal remedies following inquiry conclusions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement to address the petitioner's claim regarding the disciplinary authority and the possibility of victimization, and the court's author....
A decision must be rendered by the same individuals who heard a case to ensure procedural fairness and consistency in adjudication.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.