CAT Sets Aside Delhi Jal Board Engineer’s
Dismissal; Flags Bias Plea, Discrimination and Mechanical Appeal Order
Tribunal says disciplinary proceedings
should not have continued without deciding objection against Inquiry Officer;
grants consequential benefits
New Delhi: The Central
Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, has set aside the dismissal of
a former Delhi Jal Board Junior Engineer after finding serious procedural
infirmities in the disciplinary proceedings, including failure to decide his
objection alleging bias on the part of the Inquiry Officer.
A Bench comprising Member (Judicial) R.N.
Singh and Member (Administrative) B. Anand, by an order dated August
17, 2026, allowed O.A. No. 734/2016 filed by Mahesh Kumar,
former Junior Engineer (Electrical & Mechanical), Delhi Jal Board.
Advocate Shubham Bahl appeared and argued
the matter on behalf of the applicant.
The Tribunal set aside the appellate order dated
October 7, 2015 as well as the disciplinary authority’s order imposing the
penalty of dismissal from service. It further held that Kumar would be entitled
to consequential benefits under the applicable rules and directed compliance
preferably within six weeks.
Bias objection against Inquiry Officer ignored
Disciplinary proceedings had been initiated
against Kumar in 2013 on the allegation that he had submitted a bogus diploma
at the time of his appointment.
During the inquiry, Kumar repeatedly complained
that the Inquiry Officer was conducting the proceedings in a one-sided and
prejudicial manner and sought appointment of another Inquiry Officer. However,
neither the Inquiry Officer nor the disciplinary authority decided his
objection, and the inquiry proceeded to its conclusion.
The Tribunal held that this course was contrary
to the DoPT Office Memorandum dated November 9, 1972, which
requires disciplinary proceedings to be stayed when an objection alleging bias
against an Inquiry Officer is raised, until the competent authority considers
and decides the objection.
The Bench observed that Kumar’s repeated
objection regarding the Inquiry Officer was not disputed and held that
proceeding with the inquiry without addressing the objection violated the
applicable DoPT instructions.
Differential punishment held discriminatory
The Tribunal also accepted Kumar’s contention
that another employee, Jasveer Singh, facing similar
allegations had been awarded the lesser punishment of compulsory retirement,
whereas Kumar had been dismissed from service.
Relying upon the Supreme Court decision in Tata
Engineering & Locomotive Co. Ltd. v. Jitendra Pd. Singh & Anr.,
the Tribunal held that discriminatory treatment of similarly placed employees
in the matter of punishment would violate Article 14 of the
Constitution.
Appellate order found mechanical and unreasoned
The Tribunal further found that the appellate
authority had rejected Kumar’s statutory appeal without dealing with the
material grounds raised by him.
It described the appellate order as reflecting “non-application
of mind” and a mechanical approach. The Tribunal relied upon the
Supreme Court judgment in Mahabir Prasad v. State of Uttar Pradesh,
reiterating that quasi-judicial authorities are required to record reasons for
their decisions.
Tribunal declines remand after 12 years
Although the Tribunal observed that the matter
could ordinarily have been remitted for continuation of disciplinary
proceedings from the stage at which the defect occurred, it declined to do so
because Kumar had already attained superannuation on July 31, 2014,
and more than 12 years had elapsed.
The Bench said that the matter required to be “put
to a quietus” and observed that the Delhi Jal Board may accord Kumar
treatment similar to that given to Jasveer Singh.
The Tribunal consequently set aside the dismissal
and appellate orders, granted consequential benefits in accordance with the
relevant rules and directed the Delhi Jal Board to comply with the directions
preferably within six weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order.
Anuj Aggarwal
Advocate
K-17, 2nd Floor, Jangpura Extension,
New Delhi – 110014
483, Block-II, Lawyers Chambers,
Delhi High Court, New Delhi – 110003
Mobile: 9891403206
Email: anujaggarwal1984@gmail.com;
anujaggarwalcompany@gmail.com
Website: advocateanujaggarwal.com
Translate the above news in hindi
No comments:
Post a Comment