Prolonged disciplinary inquiries causing undue delay violate principles of natural justice, meriting quashing of proceedings.

O R D E R

PER: HON’BLE MR. VARUN SINDHU KUL KAUMUDI, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

1. The present Original Application has been filed by the applicants under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 , seeking the following relief:

i. Call for records from the Respondents;

ii. Issue writ or order quashing the impugned communication dated 03.04.2024 bearing No. CAaSuE 667 SeAaSe 2002 issued by the Respondent No.3 (Annexure-A9), all further proceedings in the interest of justice and equity;

iii. Declare that the inquiry initiated against the applicant pursuant to the notice dated 23.06.2004 issued by the 2^nd Respondent (Annexure-A1) is abandoned and quash all inquiry proceedings pursuant thereto;

iv. Issue writ or order directing the Respondents to settle all consequential benefits including pension and other benefits, in the interest of justice and equity;

v. Pass any other appropriate order as this Hon’ble Tribunal deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case, including the cost of this Application.

2. Pending final decision on the application, the applicant sought the following interim order:

“The impugned communication dated 03.04.2024 issued by the Respondent No.3 to the applicant herein is arbitrary and liable to be interfered with at the hands of this Hon’ble Court ............to stay the operation, implementation and execution of the impugned communication dated 03.04.2024 bearing No. CAaSuE 667 SeAaSe 2002 issued by the Respondent No.3 (Annexure-A9), and all further proceedings thereon, in the interest of justice and equity.”

3. The facts of the case, in a nutshell, are as follows:

i. The applicant was initially appointed as Assistant Commissioner in the year 1979. The Union of India, the 1^st Respondent, enacted the All India Services Act, 1951, to regulate the recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to the All India Services common to the Union and the States. Invoking powers conferred under the Act of 1951, the 1^st Respondent enacted the Indian Administrative Service (Appointment by Selection) Regulations, 1997, for considering the cases of Non State Civil Service Officers for appointment by selection to the prestigious Indian Administrative Service. The applicant was selected to the said Indian Administrative Service in the year 1999 and allotted the year of 1992. The applicant, after serving the Government, retired from service, on attaining the age of superannuation, on 31.12.2015.

ii. While the applicant was working as Managing Director, GESCOM, Gulbarga, the 2^nd Respondent issued notice, dated 23.06.2004, under Rule 8 of the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1969, along with the Articles of Charge alleging that, while the applicant was working as Secretary, Karnataka Public Service Commission (KPSC), he committed certain acts which constitute grave misconduct under the All India Services (Conduct) Rules, 1968. The applicant submitted his reply to the said Articles of Charge, denying all the charges levelled against him. Thereafter, Respondent No.3 passed an order, on 29.09.2006, appointing Shri Abijit Dasgupta, IAS, as the Inquiry Officer, in place of Sri M.N.Vijaykumar, IAS, by modifying the order, dt.06.09.2004, to conduct the departmental inquiry against the applicant.

iii. The Inquiry Officer conducted the inquiry against the applicant on the charges levelled in the Articles of Charge, dated 23.06.2004, and submitted the Inquiry Report (IR for short) on 29.10.2010, holding that all the three charges levelled against