Review applications are confined to correcting self-evident errors, and extensions for compliance must be justified to prevent unnecessary delays in disciplinary proceedings.

ORDER

[In Circulation]

Per Urmita Datta (Sen), Judicial Member:-

The instant Review Application has been filed by the Applicants /Original Respondents praying to review / withdraw/ Recall/ modify/set aside the Judgement/Order dated 27.08.2024 passed in M.A. No. 756/2024 and O.A. 157/2024 wherein after hearing the Ld. Counsel for both sides and perusing the material available on record this Tribunal has observed as under:

“Heard learned counsel for both sides.

The present MA. 756/2024 has been filed by the original respondents praying for further extension of 06 months' time to comply with the order dated 06.02.2024 passed in OA. 157/2024 and order dated 03.05.2024 in MA. 442/2024 in connection with OA. 157/2024.

It is noticed that earlier the original respondents had filed another MA bearing No. 442/2024 for extension of time along with MA. 443/2024 for condonation of delay for filing such application of extension of time. The said MA. 442/2024 was disposed of on 03.05.2024 by extending the time limit of 03 months to comply with the order dated 06.02.2024 passed in OA. 157/2024.

Today, learned counsel for original applicant (Respondent in MA) vehemently objected for extending the time limit to comply with the order dated 06.02.2024.

It would be evident that the disciplinary proceeding against the applicant was initiated in the year 2016, however, the said disciplinary proceedings is still pending though this Tribunal vide order dated 06.02.2024 in OA. 157/2024 directed the following :

" 4. Considering the aforesaid submission, we deem it fit to dispose of this original application, at admission stage, with a direction upon the respondent/competent authority to dispose of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the applicant and consider the pending representation of the applicant dated 08.02.2022/15.11.2023 as per the extant rules, within a period of 04 weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order."

Today, learned counsel for applicant in MA(Original Respondents) submits that the Competent Respondents Authority i.e. C.B.I vide letter dated 18.06.2024 has already sent the case of the applicant to the UPSC for their consideration since the UPSC is loaded with the other cases, therefore, they need some more time to send back their advice in regard to the present applicant.

It has been submitted by the learned counsel for original applicant that inquiry report was served upon the applicant on 04.03.2021 and thereafter applicant had submitted his representation on 30.04.2021 which has not been controverted by the learned counsel for original respondents that the representation against the I.O's report was already submitted in the year 2021.

Therefore, we fail to understand that what has been left with the Disciplinary Authority to pass a final order in the case of the applicant rather than taking a different ground that UPSC is busy with other cases therefore they could not send back their advice in respect to the present case, which is not at all acceptable at this stage.

In our considered opinion, it is the duty of the Disciplinary Authority to complete the inter departmental formalities within the time granted by this Court. Thus, the Court cannot grant repeated time to complete such proceedings.

Thus, we do not find any reason for extending further time of 6 months to comply with the order of this Tribunal dated 06.02.2024