Nagendra Pal Singh vs Union of India and Others

Arun Mishra, C.J.—The appeal is taken up for hearing treating the same as on day''s list. Heard Shri Pradip Roy, learned counsel for the appellant and Shri Provat Kumar Chattopadhyay, learned counsel for the respondents.

The intra-Court appeal has been preferred questioning the legality of the decision rendered by the Single Bench in W.P. No. 16123 (W) of 2013 on 1.7.2013. A Staff Court of Enquiry was conducted against the petitioner in which disciplinary proceedings had been recommended against him. Thereafter, the disciplinary proceeding was initiated against the petitioner and he had been charge-sheeted on 12.4.2013. There are inasmuch as five charges framed against the petitioner. Following are the charges against him:

The petitioner has questioned the charge sheet before the Single Bench on various grounds. The writ petition had been dismissed by the impugned order. Hence, the intra-Court appeal has been preferred.

Shri Roy, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant has submitted that there was delay in issuing the charge-sheet. In such cases, enquiry has to be completed within a period of three months. Thus, issuance of charge-sheet was illegal. He has also submitted that the Court of Enquiry which made the recommendation to hold the disciplinary proceeding against the petitioner was also illegally conducted. No opportunity was given to cross-examine the witness. Thus, there was violation of principles of natural justice. Learned counsel also submitted that there was no lawful command issued of which there could be any violation. Thus, the holding of departmental enquiry was uncalled for and charge-sheet is required to be quashed.

Shri Chattopadhyay, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents has supported the impugned order. He has submitted that the departmental enquiry has been rightly conducted pursuant to the recommendation made by the Court of Enquiry. No case for interference is made out at the disciplinary proceeding at this stage.

After hearing the learned counsel of the parties, we find that the Single Bench has rightly addressed the issue. There are as many as five charges levelled against the petitioner. There are two charges with respect to disobeying a lawful command given by his superior officer and two charges related to an act prejudicial to good order and discipline of the force and another charge is also making false accusation against person subject to the BSF Act knowing such accusation to be false, which was subject-matter of e-mail. Thus, the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the appellant that e-mail was the only basis of issuing charge-sheet cannot be said to be justified. There are various charges also. At the stage of charge-sheet, normally interference has not to be made on merits of the case. There is no jurisdictional competence alleged by the appellant. The Court of Enquiry was conducted and the disciplinary proceeding was recommended by Court of Enquiry and the delay cannot be said very much so as to quash the charge-sheet itself. No doubt about it that the departmental enquiry has to be completed at an early date. Obviously, the respondent is supposed to complete the departmental proceedings as expeditiously as possible subject to co-operation of the petitioner.

The Single Bench has referred to the decision in the case of The Special Director and Another Vs. Mohd. Ghulam Ghouse and Another, ). As the charge-sheet does not suffer from any serious infirmity in the present case, we find no case is made out so as to interfere at this stage. However, we keep all the questions open and make it clear that any observation made by the Single Bench or by this Court in this order shall not come in the way of the disciplinary authority to proceed with the matter independently.

The appeal is accordingly dismissed.

In view of the dismissal of the appeal, the connected application, being C.A.N. 7712 of 2013, is also dismissed.

The parties are to bear their own costs. Urgent photostat certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the appearing parties upon compliance of necessary formalities.