Vagueness of charge memo, delay in initiation of disciplinary proceedings, impermissibility of piecemeal enquiry

JUDGMENT

(Prayer: Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorari, calling for the proceedings of the third respondent Tribunal in TDP Case No.2 of 2013; Ref. No.130/2013/A1 dated 17.04.2014 and quash the same insofar as the petitioner is concerned.

Writ Petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, praying to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records relating to the proceedings of the Commissioner for Disciplinary Proceedings, Coimbatore, the third respondent herein in TDP. Case No.2 of 2013 dated 17.04.2014, quash the same insofar as the petitioners are concerned and direct the respondents 1 and 2 herein to promote the petitioners herein notionally to the post of Assistant Director of Horticulture on par with their immediate juniors in their appropriate place on a regular basis which has been withheld on account of the above charges with all consequential service and monetary benefits within a short date as may be fixed by this Court.)

Common Order

1. All the petitioners herein have been implicated through a common charge memo dated 17.04.2014, alleging that while working as Horticulture Officers in the Horticulture Department, Coimbatore, they had approved ineligible applications and sanctioned the subsidy amounts, without verifying the genuineness of the beneficiaries and thereby misappropriated the subsidies intended for various development schemes during the year 2001-2002. Since all the petitioners have been implicated through a common charge memo with identical charges, both the Writ Petitions are disposed of through a common order.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

3. Some of the undisputed facts of the case are that, the incident for which the impugned charge memo was issued relates to the year 2001-2002 when the petitioners were working as Horticulture Officers in the Department of Horticulture, Coimbatore. Prior to the issuance of the present charge memo, they were earlier subjected to similar charges alleging identical lapses for the year 2002-2003, which was taken for adjudication in TDP Case No.9 of 2007 before the Tribunal for Disciplinary Proceedings, Coimbatore and through orders dated 04.11.2013, the charges came to be dropped, since the charges were held as "not proved" in the enquiry conducted by the Commissioner for Disciplinary Proceedings. It is also not in dispute that, when the TDP Case No.9 of 2007 relatingto the year 2002-03 was initiated, the facts leading to the issuance of the present impugned charge memo was very much available at that time.

4. The powers of the Writ Court to interfere and quash a charge memo has been dealt with in various decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court, as well as this Court, wherein certain exceptions have been culled out for such an interference. Among these exceptions, the vagueness of the charge memo, the delay in initiation of the disciplinary proceedings, the fact that the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings will eventually result in favour of the delinquent or some of them.

5. In the present case, the impugned charge memo does not contain any specific charges with regard to the allegations made against these petitioners. There are no statement of allegations supporting the charge memo and reading of the charge memo does not indicate as to the period of occurrence when the respondents had alleged the mal-practice. Apart from this, there are no list of witnesses or documents on which the Commissioner of Disciplinary Proceedings intended to rely upon to substantiate the charges.

6. The procedure for conducting the TDP proceedings is under Rule 17b of the Tamil Nadu Civil Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules [hereinafter referred to as "the Rules"]. As per the Schedule, when it is proposed to impose a major penalty under Rule 8, the grounds on which it is proposed to take action should be reduced to definite charges, together with the statement of allegations on