Courts and Tribunals should not interfere in disciplinary proceedings at the stage of issuance of a charge sheet, as such intervention is premature unless the authority lacks jurisdiction or the charge is fundamentally illegal; the truth of allegations must be determined by the disciplinary authority via inquiry.

ORDER (ORAL)

Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative

In this case relating to charge sheet, the applicant has sought following reliefs:

(i) This Hon'ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to quash the Charge sheet dated 24.05.2024 (contained in Annexure no. A-1 to this O.A.) issued by respondent no. 3.

(ii) To direct the authority concerned to treat the applicant eligible for the selection held in 2013, as the applicant was also having equivalent diploma i.e. Post Graduate Diploma in Intellectual Property Rights, NIMS University in year 2012, recognized by the UGC, prior to issuance of advertisement no. 02/2013.

(iii) To pass such other orders which are found just, fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.

(iv) To allow the original application with cost.

2. The facts of the case are that the applicant was proceeded against departmentally with the issue of memorandum dated 24.05.2024 under rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 [CCS (CCA) Rules, hereafter]. The memorandum alleges that the applicant, by furnishing an invalid and non-recognized certificate as proof of his qualification in Post Graduate Diploma in Intellectual Property Law from Kanpur Vidyapeeth, Uttar Pradesh, while applying for the post of Senior Technical Officer (2) advertised vide advertisement no. 02/2013 by the respondents, violated the Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3.1 The applicant’s first contention is that he disclosed his educational qualifications with certificates, under the bona fide belief that Kanpur Vidyapeeth is a recognized institution, to the respondents who offered him appointment vide letter dated 09.12.2013 to the post after satisfying themselves of his eligibility and as such he cannot be blamed for having made any misrepresentation. It is further averred that despite repeated requests the respondents themselves have not been able to show as to which institute in India was authorized to award Post Graduate Diploma in Intellectual Property Law till July, 2013, i.e., upto the date of selection of the applicant, and if the essential qualification mentioned in the advertisement no. 02/2013 itself was non-existent as per the respondents’ definition, how could they have asked for the same. Moreover, condition 2 (c) of the advertisement provided that “…The prescribed qualification should have been obtained through recognized Universities/institutions etc…” and so the word ‘etc.’ covers the applicant’s case. Lastly, Kanpur Vidyapeeth has not been declared as fake university by UGC.

3.2 His second contention is that following a complaint in 2015, the respondents constituted a Fact Finding Committee which asked him to produce original documents on 26.05.2016 which were submitted by him, but the respondents issued office memorandum dated 26.12.2016 asking the applicant to submit original documents again which he did on 10.01.2017; but it was only after a gap of 6 years that the respondents issued him show cause notice dated 23.05.2023 on the ground that University Grants Commission (UGC) had informed that Kanpur Vidyapeeth is not included in the UGC list of universities and respondent no. 3 issued the impugned charge sheet dated 24.05.2024 for the recruitment held in 2013 which is hit by inordinate and unexplained delay.

3.3 The third contention of the applicant is that in any case he has obtained Post Graduate Diploma in Intellectual Property Rights from NIMS University, Jaipur in the year 2012 which is a recognized university and so he cannot be declared ineligible for recruitment.

4.1 In regard to the first contention of the applicant, the respondents state that the Department of Personnel & Training (DoPT, hereafter) has issued OM dated 19.05.1996 on the subject “Action against Government servants to be taken if they are later found ineligible or unqual