Delay in disciplinary proceedings mandates prompt resolution; courts enforce employee rights for timely payment of dues.

JUDGMENT :

HARPREET SINGH BRAR, J.

1. This order of mine shall dispose of both the above-mentioned writ petitions.

2. The present writ petition bearing CWP-11580-2017 has been filed under Article 226 /227 of the Constitution of India with the following prayers:-

i) “For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus directing the respondents to release all the retiral dues including gratuity, leave encashment and the salary for the period 01.04.2011 to 15.05.2011 with interest @ 18% per annum. from the date of its accrual till its realization and further directions be issued to the respondents to release the revised pay scale for the post of Inspector Grade-II w.e.f. 01.12.2011 with interest @ 18% p.a. from its accrual till its realization.

3. The writ petition bearing CWP-12993-2017 has been filed with the following prayers:-

i) “For issuance of a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus for calling record of the impugned order dated 22.11.2016(Annexure P-8) passed by respondent No.1 and to set aside the same being illegal, besides granting all consequential benefits treating the period of suspension as duty period and to pay all necessary financial benefits including pay and allowances.

ii) Further directing the respondents to release all the consequential financial by way of arrears with interest @ 18% per annum from the date of its accrual till its realization.”

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends in CWP- 12993-2017, that in the departmental inquiry the petitioner was placed under suspension w.e.f. 16.05.2011. The respondent-Corporation has served the charge sheet upon petitioner after putting him under suspension after a gap of 6 months i.e. on 02.11.2011. Thereafter, on 09.03.2012 the inquiry officer was appointed. He submitted his report on 18.10.2012, exonerating the petitioner. However, the Managing Director of the respondent-Corporation gave a dissenting note dated 15.01.2014. After keeping the petitioner under suspension for more than 3 ½ years, he was reinstated on 27.02.2015 and stood retired on 28.02.2015. Thereafter, the order of punishment was issued on 10.11.2015 vide which the suspension period w.e.f. 16.05.2011 to 27.02.2015 was ordered to be treated as leave of kind due. He further emphasized on the fact that petitioner was suspended on 16.05.2011 and the punishment order was passed after 4 ½ years. As such, on the ground of delay, the disciplinary proceedings stand vitiated. It is trite law that the disciplinary proceedings are required to be concluded within a reasonable despatch and relies upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court passed in Prem Nath Bali Versus Registrar, High Court of Delhi and another, 2015 The punishing authority has awarded a minor punishment of censure and at the same time, ordered the period of suspension to be considered as the leave of the kind due. It is settled law that pending inquiry cannot be converted into a mode of suspension even before culmination of the disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner is entitled to pay, during the suspension period, firstly on account of delay for which no fault can be fastened upon the petitioner in causing hurdles in the swift disposal of the disciplinary proceedings. Secondly, the petitioner was awarded a minor punishment and was denied the pay during the period of suspension. The nominated period of suspension running into 3 ½ years is not justified in any manner.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends in CWP-11580-2017 that the claim of the petitioner is with regard to release of the retiral dues including gratuity, leave en