SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 9671

CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Akhil Kumar Srivastava, J, Mallika Arya, A
Sushovan Banerjee – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
Original Applications Nos.200/351/2024 & 200/512/2024



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Shri Pankaj Dubey
For the Respondents: Shri Divesh Jain

Court quashed the chargesheets against retired officers due to lack of substantial evidence and prior exoneration of similar cases.

Headnote:(A) All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1966 - Chargesheet issued under Rule 7(1)

(B) - Applicants challenged the legality of the chargesheet concerning a multi-crore online tender scam involving serious irregularities - The court found prior exoneration of similarly situated officers rendered proceedings against applicants unjustified and legally indefensible. (Paras 5, 8, 9, 10)

(B) Quashing of Chargesheet - It is well-established that a charge-sheet does not provide a cause of action, and ordinarily will not be quashed unless wholly illegal or issued without jurisdiction - However, when the foundation of a charge relies on insufficient evidence, the court retains the authority to intervene. (Para 7)

Facts of the case:
The case arises from allegations against the applicants, both retired IPS officers, regarding their involvement in a major e-tendering scam during their tenure, leading to disciplinary actions based on vague entries in loose papers, closely tied to investigations by both the Income Tax department and EOW.

Findings of Court:
The court ruled that initiating charging processes against officers based on undocumented evidence such as loose sheets proves legally unsustainable as they infringe upon the applicants' rights, thus quashing the charge-sheet under Article 226.

Issues: The primary questions addressed were the legality of the disciplinary proceedings founded on vague evidence and the equal treatment of similarly situated individuals previously exonerated.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that a charge-sheet based on flimsy evidence is not justifiable, especially when a similarly situated officer was exonerated, thus establishing that the proceeding against the applicants bears no legal merit.

Result: Both Original Applications are allowed, and the impugned chargesheet is quashed.

Table of Content
1. overview of the factual context of the case. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments regarding the legality of disciplinary proceedings. (Para 5 , 6)
3. judicial observations emphasizing on the evidence standards for disciplinary actions. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. final ruling on the legitimacy of the charges. (Para 10)

ORDER

By Akhil Kumar Srivastava, JM;

The applicants in these Original Applications are challenging the chargesheet dated 24.02.2021 issued under Rule 7(1)(B) of All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1966. Since the issue involved in both these Original Applications is identical in nature, we propose to decide both the cases by way of a common order. For the purpose of this order, facts and the documents referred in OA 200/351/2024 have been taken as a leading case.

2. Brief facts of the case are that the applicant is a retired IPS officer. During his tenure as Director General, EOW, M.P. Bhopal from 04.10.2019 to 27.03.2020, the applicant was entrusted to investigate into the multi-crore online tender scam, which relates to large scale and gross irregularities in the manner of allotment of Government contracts and involvement of various politicians, bureaucrats and businessmen. The irregularities relate to the e- tendering process of various State Government projects which was compromised and manipulated to benefit select private players from State Departments. The first step in exposing the scam was initiated by the MP State Electronics Development Corporation (MP- SEDC) which conducted an internal enquiry into the matter wherein it was found that the bid process of contracts of State Government were allegedly manipulated in order to benefit various companies based in Mumbai, Hyderabad etc., with the help of insiders, who provided sneak previews to such companies into the bid prices in an unauthorized manner so that those companies to make lower bids to get the tenders awarded to them. The various departments/corporation whose projects were thus manipulated and rigged in the above manner ranged from Public Works Department, Water Resources Department, MP Road Development Corporation, MP State Industrial Development Corporation etc.

2.1 The MP-SEDC had issued show cause notices to service providers viz; Tata Consultancy Services and Antares Systems on 06.06.2018 for non compliance with the terms and conditions of the Request for Proposal (RFP) of the contract agreements. The MP-SEDC later alerted other departments to cancel their tenders in view of the alleged manipulations and rigging that was taking place.

2.2 Subsequently, on the orders of the Chief Secretary, Government of Madhya Pradesh, some tenders were handed over to the EOW of the State Police for an investigation under the Information Technology Act , 2000 on the ground that tampering of e-ports is tantamount to economic and cyber fraud. Consequently, a preliminary enquiry was first registered by EOW and after investigations and FIR was registered in April 2019 against some suspected politicians, bureaucrats and companies on charges that pertained to fraud and violation of the IT Act, 2000 and other transgressions, leading to invocation of the Prevention of Corruption Act , 1988. The actions of EOW were also based on a report by the Computer Emergency Response Team (CERT), which is the national nodal agency for responding to computer security incidents as and when they occur and functions under the Union Ministry of Electronics and IT.

2.3 In the midst of the investigation, the applicant was transferred from EOW M.P. Bhopal to Sagar as Director JNPA and the applicant had duly joined his new assignment.

2.4 On 07.04.2019, certain search operations were conducted at the premises of a private individual named Shri Prateek Joshi by the Income Tax Department under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act , 1961. The applicant has never received any notice under Section 153C of the Income Tax Act 1961. Based upon the aforesaid search operation, the Income Tax De

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top