IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
S.M. SUBRAMANIAM, J.
Sujoy Gupta, Deputy Commandant Central Industrial Security Force Unit, Chennai Petroleum Corporation Limited, Chennai - Appellant
Versus
The Director General, Central Industrial Security Force, New Delhi & Others - Respondents
W.P. No. 27843 of 2017 & W.M.P. Nos. 29867 of 2017 & 2856 of 2018
Decided on : 02-07-2018
Charge Memorandum - Disciplinary Proceedings - Rules 3(1) of CCS(conduct)Rules, 1964 - [Rules 3(1) of CCS(conduct)Rules, 1964] - The court discussed the charge memorandum issued against the writ petitioner, highlighting the allegations of supervisory lapses and the legal grounds for entertaining a writ petition against a charge memo. The court emphasized the limited scope of judicial review against the charge memo and the necessity for disciplinary proceedings to be concluded within a reasonable period of time.
Fact of the Case:
The writ petitioner challenged the charge memorandum issued against him, contending that the allegations of supervisory lapses were false and untenable based on the enquiry report's findings. The petitioner argued that the charge sheet should be scrapped as he was found innocent in the enquiry report.
Finding of the Court:
The court held that no writ can be entertained against a charge memo in a routine manner and emphasized the limited scope of judicial review against the charge memo. It stated that the disciplinary proceedings must be concluded within a reasonable period of time to avoid affecting the service prospects of the employee.
Issues: The issues revolved around the validity of the charge memorandum, the scope of judicial review against the charge memo, and the necessity for timely conclusion of disciplinary proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that a writ against a charge memo shall be entertained only on exceptional circumstances and highlighted the limited scope of judicial review against the charge memo. It also stressed the importance of concluding disciplinary proceedings within a reasonable period of time.
Final Decision: The writ petition was dismissed, and the court directed the writ petitioner to participate in the departmental disciplinary proceedings, emphasizing that the disciplinary authority is bound to consider the same on merits and demerits of the matter and pass final orders in accordance with the law.
1. The Charge Memorandum issued against the writ petitioner by the Deputy Inspector General(Legal) in proceedings dated 24.05.2017 is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. The writ petitioner, Mr.Sujoy Gupta, Deputy Commandant, Central Industrial Security Force Unit (CISF) has appeared as party-in-person. The writ petitioner is able to articulate his case in a proper manner. The petitioner contended that the charge memo against him is improper and contrary to the findings of the enquiry report made in this regard. The allegation of Supervisory lapses contended in the charge sheet are false and untenable on the ground that the enquiry report states that the writ petitioner is an innocent officer and uncommunicated with the crimes committed by certain other personnel working in CISF . The petitioner is of an opinion that, when the enquiry report states that he is not responsible for any of the allegations, then there is no reason to proceed with the disciplinary proceedings against him. The petitioner has submitted the copy of the enquiry report stating that the findings are in his favour. Further, he contended that the Department is acting against him with a view to harass him. Thus, the charge sheet is liable to be scrapped.
3. The learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the respondents opposed the contentions by stating that it is premature to raise all these contentions at this point of time when the department has not in collusion in respect of the charges framed against the writ petitioner. The writ petitioner is a responsible officer working in the cadre of Deputy Commandant and therefore, the Charge Memorandum framed against him in respect of the supervisory lapses committed is to be examined in detail by the enquiry officer and only thereafter, the disciplinary authority will be in a position to take a decision in this regard. Even before forming a complete opinion in respect of such supervisory lapses, the disciplinary authority will not be in a position to arrive a conclusion whether the writ petitioner is innocent or not. Thus, the writ petition is premature and liable to be rejected in limini.
4. The charges framed against the writ petitioner are extracted hereunder:
"STATEMENT OF IMPUTATION OF MISCONDUCT OR MISBEHAVIOUR ON WHICH ACTION IS PROPOSED TO BE TAKEN AGAINST SHRI SUJOY GUPTA, DEPUTY COMMANDANT, CISF.
Shri Sujoy Gupta, Dy.Commandant while posted as Assistant Commandant at CISF Unit NTPC Barh during the period from 01.11.2012 to 09.08.2014, failed in his supervisory duties as per the following paras:
(a) In the night of 19.04.2014 at about 2330 hrs, on information, a vehicle (Trailer)bearing Registration No.WB-37-8459 loaded with Iron Rods worth about Rs.10 lakhs was intercepted by Local Police, P.S.Pandarak, Distt.Patna(Bihar)at NH-31 when the said Vehicle was exiting material gate of NTPC Barh for which major disciplinary proceedings were initiated against Coy Commander and Shift In-charge and they were awarded major penalties. Besides, minor penalty proceedings were also initiated against 04 other personnel for allowing the said vehicle without checking or making entry in outgoing material register and they have also been awarded minor penalties.
(b) Shri Sujoy Gupta, despite receipt of information from NTPC General Manager on 20.04.2014 around 0100 hrs that a vehicle was seized at a distance of less them 1 Km away from NTPC on NH-31, he and his staff did not bother to check and verify the facts. Instead, on the pretext of non-availability of transport in the Unit he was roaming inside the Plant on foot with staff and there after he went back to his home. Though he alerted the CIW I/C and the Coy. Commander, none of them responded adequately.
(c) Shri Sujoy Gupta, DC has failed to send intimation about the above incident to the higher informations through Daily Situation Reports(DSR) or any means of communication on 19 & 20.04.2014. It was only on 21.04.2014 after news wa
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.