Inordinate delay in disciplinary proceedings without sufficient justification undermines the integrity of the process and violates principles of natural justice, warranting quashing of the charge memo.

ORDER (ORAL)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A):-

By way of the present OA filed u/s 19 of the AT Act, 1985, the applicant, in para 8 of the OA, has prayed for the following reliefs: -

“a) Quash and set aside the impugned charge memo dated 1.9.2021 (ANNEXURE-A-1) and the consequential departmental proceedings;

b) Order for consequential reliefs

c) Award costs

d) Pass such further orders/directions as this Hon’ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in favour of the Applicant in the interest of justice.”

FACTS OF THE CASE

2. The applicant submits that in the month of August, 2006, dengue fever started spreading at alarming speed, some activists filed PIL in High Court of Delhi. High Court started monitoring the health service management in Delhi. Steps, like carrying of campaign to educate people which included printing of leaflets, distribution thereof through CDMOs and printing of cards to be used in schools whereby involving students and their parents in implementing check on breeding of dengue spreading mosquitoes, were decided to be taken. DHS assigned responsibilities to CMO (CT) and proceed with completion of printing and distribution of print materials. DHS constituted a Committee of two doctors and a Sr. AO to finalize assignment for printing job. Job was assigned to one M/s Rajdhani Enterprises on 29.08.2006 for supply of 7.2 lakh leaflets and 11.70 lakh cards. In September, 2006, 80,000 printed leaflets were supplied to each of the 8 CDMOs and one Mobile Health Service Unit totalling to 7.2 lakh, and 97500 cards to each of the 12 zonal offices of education headed by Deputy Directors of Education, totalling to 11.7 lakhs.

3. It is also stated that in October, 2006, complaints received alleging irregularities in procedure of placing order of printing, maintenance of record of receipt and delivery of products. In November, 2006, the applicant and director, Health Services are transferred suddenly without following procedures of handing over and taking over the charge. In December, 2006, anaudit was conducted by a Special Audit Team and the same was concluded in March, 2007. One Dr. Dewan was appointed to conduct investigation and file the report.

4. Pursuant to above investigation report, the applicant was served with a Show Cause Notice, without annexing the materials in support of allegations of irregularities in 2010- 2011. The applicant states that he filed his reply in 2012.

5. The applicant submits that in September, 2018, his services were placed under suspension. In 2021, applicant’s suspension was revoked and he was served with the charge memo on the issue of above alleged irregularities. Hence, the present O.A.

6. The applicant contends that in the OM dated 29.11.2012, it is clearly stated that it is mandatory to initiate departmental proceedings where warranted without undue delay as the departmental proceedings otherwise are held to be bad in law.

SUBMISSION MADE BY RESPONDENTS

5. The respondents have filed their counter reply on 13.07.2022 wherein they have stated that the Department has procured printing 11.7 lacs Dengue Cardsand 7.2 lacs Dengue Reflects amounting to Rs. 19.98 lacs from M/s Rajdhani Enterprises. Scrutiny of the records, the following irregularities have been observed: -

(a) The Department has invited quotations for supply of printingDengue Cards and Dengue Leaf-lets from nine suppliers and notice board but web-based publicity has not been given for said limited tenders which is against the instruction of CVC vide