Chargesheets cannot be quashed without establishing malafides or lack of authority; suspension before retirement is unwarranted.

Order

1. The instant writ petition has been filed by the petitioner against two different orders passed on the same date i.e. 18.08.2024, by which he has been place under suspension and chargesheet has been issued against him with regard to three different charges.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is going to retire on 31.08.2024 after attaining the age of superannuation. Counsel submits that the petitioner has served the respondent-department for more than 37 years and during these years, his service record remained unblemished and there was no iota of complaint against him and no departmental proceedings were ever initiated against him. Counsel submits that at the fag end of the service of the petitioner i.e. 12 days prior to his retirement, because of malafides, a chargesheet has been issued to the petitioner on fake allegations and he has been placed under suspension, hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court warranted.

3. Per contra, learned counsel for the State respondent opposed the arguments raised by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that serious charges are levelled against the petitioner which indicate that the petitioner has misused his power and position to give the benefit to certain persons. Counsel submits that it is settled proposition of law that chargesheet issued against a delinquent cannot be quashed, unless and until allegations of malafides are there or the chargesheet has been issued by an authority not competent to issue the same. Counsel submits that both these elements are missing in the instant case, hence, under these circumstances, interference of this Court is not warranted.

4. Heard and considered the submissions made at Bar and perused the material available on the record.

5. Perusal of the record indicates that the petitioner served the respondent-department for about 37 years and during his entire service carrier, no charge-sheet was issued against him and no departmental proceedings were initiated against him. On 18.08.2024, a memorandum of chargesheet has been issued to the petitioner with regard to certain charges of misuse of his power and position and on the basis of the aforesaid chargesheet, the petitioner has been placed under suspension.

6. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the respondents, the petitioner has approached this Court by way of filing the instant writ petition assailing the impugned suspension order as well as the issuance of chargesheet to him.

7. It is settled proposition of law that chargesheet cannot be quashed prior to conducting the inquiry, on the facts stated in the chargesheet. It is settled proposition of law that to examine correctness or truth of the charge is a function of the disciplinary authority, as has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Orissa vs. Sangram Keshari Misra: reported in 2010 (13) SCC 311.

8. The respondents are not precluded from initiating the enquiry against an employee for any misconduct or violation of the Conduct Rules, even if the same has taken place, while performing or not performing the official functions and discharging the duties.

9. In the considered opinion of this Court, a writ petition does not lie against the charge-sheet, unless it is established that the same has been issued by an authority not competent to initiate the disciplinary proceedings.

10. Looking to the fact that chargesheet cannot be interfered by the Court lightly or in a routine manner, the delinquent-employee instead of seeking quashing of the charge-sheet, at the initial stage, must submit his reply before the Enquiry Officer/Disciplinary Authority and wait for conclusion of the proceedings.

11. In view of the above, the chargesheet cannot be quashed by this Court. The petitioner is free to submit his reply before the authority concerned and the authority concerned is expected to consider the same before passing the final order.

12. So far as the suspension order of the petition