Charge sheet upheld where Disciplinary Authority approved via file notings with application of mind; natural justice requires supplying relied-upon documents; proceedings abeyed pending review post-defence under Rule 14(5)(a) CCS (CCA) Rules.

O R D E R

By Hon’ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J) :-

1.In the present Original Application (O.A.), the applicant has prayed for the following reliefs:

“a) Quash and set aside the Chargesheet bearing File No. F.No. C-14011/2/2024-AD.EF dated 26.12.2024 issued to the applicant which was received by her on 9.1.2025 being malafide and non-compliance of Rule 14 and hence the chargesheet is vitiated.

b) Direct that the recommendation of the Selection Committee for the post of Additional Director of Enforcement (Prosecution) in relation to the Applicant in a which has been kept in “sealed cover” be opened and the same may be informed to the applicant.

c) Quash and set aside the Order bearing File No. A-35011/25/2021-Ad.ED dated 3/4.3.2025 under the signatures of the Under Secretary (Ad.ED) by which it has been informed that the Approval has been granted for the promotion of Shri Naveen Kumar B, Deputy Legal Advisor to the post of Additional Director of Enforcement (Prosecution) against Vacancy Year 2023 on “officiating basis” till the opening of the recommendations of the Selection Committee kept in “sealed cover”

d) Declare that the grading and remarks recorded in the memorandum would be expunged and not be treated as 'adverse' or below benchmark for consideration of the case of the applicant for further promotion and to grant all consequential benefits in light of the expunged remarks.

e) Pass any other order(s) as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem appropriate.”

2. On 14.07.2025, the present matter was heard on the preliminary objections raised by the respondents on 02.07.2025, and judgment was reserved on the issue of maintainability of the OA. Subsequently, vide order dated 21.07.2025, the OA was held to be maintainable. Aggrieved thereby, the respondents preferred Writ Petition (C) No. 11187/2025 before the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi. The Hon’ble High Court, vide order dated 30.07.2025 passed in the said Writ Petition, observed as under:

“5. As the impugned order has been passed only on the preliminary objection raised by the petitioner herein, and without considering the O.A. filed on merits, any observations made by the learned Tribunal shall not bind it at the time of hearing the O.A. itself on merits. The petitioner shall be entitled to raise these issues again when the learned Tribunal considers the O.A. on merits.

6. With the above clarification, the present petition is disposed of. The pending application is also disposed of as being infructuous.”

3. The applicant, who appeared in person submitted that in view of the decision rendered in OA No. 2385/2024 & batch, relief 'd' has become infructuous. The main relief in the present OA is that the charge sheet dated 26.12.2024 be quashed.

3.1. The applicant submitted that she is aggrieved by the issuance of the charge sheet dated 26.12.2024, initiating disciplinary proceedings under Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, by the respondents, the action of keeping the recommendation of the Selection Committee for the post of Additional Director of Enforcement (Prosecution) in a “sealed cover,” and the subsequent promotion of Shri Naveen Kumar B to the said post on an officiating basis vide order dated 3/4.3.2025, pending opening of the sealed cover. The charge sheet cannot be sustained because the Disciplinary Authority of the applicant is the Hon’ble President of India, whose powers have been delegated to the Hon’ble Finance Minister under the Transaction of Business Rules. For all practical purposes, therefore, the Finance Minister is the Disciplinary Authority. There has been non-compliance of Rule 14(2), as no opinion has been formed by t