Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
ANIL KSHETARPAL, AMIT MAHAJAN
Union Of India – Appellant
Versus
Sameer Danyadev Wankhede – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. summary of the factual background of the case. (Para 1 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 2. court's observations on the procedural issues. (Para 2 , 12 , 13 , 26 , 28 , 29 , 32 , 33) |
| 3. arguments presented by petitioners and respondents. (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 4. ratio decidendi concerning the validity of charges. (Para 37 , 43 , 46 , 51 , 55 , 57) |
| 5. final conclusion and order of the court. (Para 56 , 58) |
JUDGMENT :
ANIL KSHETARPAL, J.
1. While invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Petitioners pray for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari to quash and set aside the order passed by Central Administrative Tribunal [hereinafter referred to as ‘CAT/the Tribunal’] on 19.01.2026 in O.A. No. 3258 of 2025 while quashing the following Articles of Charges at the initial stage:-
“Article of Charge 1
That Shri Sameer Wankhede, despite having been formally detached from the Narcotics Control Bureau on 02.01.2022 and hence with no mandate relating to investigation of Case No. 94/2021 (NCB), wilfully and deliberately sought sensitive and confidential information from Shri. Japan B
Judicial review of disciplinary charge memos is limited; premature quashing is improper if charges are supported by evidence, requiring internal resolutions first.
Charge sheet upheld where Disciplinary Authority approved via file notings with application of mind; natural justice requires supplying relied-upon documents; proceedings abeyed pending review post-d....
Judicial review in disciplinary matters is limited; delay alone does not invalidate proceedings unless prejudice is demonstrated.
Disciplinary proceedings must be supported by adequate evidence, and a lack of procedural compliance can lead to judicial intervention.
Disciplinary proceedings cannot be quashed solely on the ground of delay; the severity of allegations must also be considered.
Neighborhood disputes, especially involving family members, do not constitute official misconduct, and disciplinary proceedings initiated on such grounds without substantial evidence violate principl....
Charge memo invalid without witness list to prove documents under CCS (CCA) Rule 14(3), violating natural justice principles.
Vagueness of charge memo, delay in initiation of disciplinary proceedings, impermissibility of piecemeal 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
