Can’t allow delinquent officials to dilute inquiry proceedings: HC

Dismissing a plea moved K Rasu, Deputy Director of Agriculture, seeking to quash the charge memo issued against him based on departmental disciplinary inquiry in 2017, Justice SM Subramaniam, said a writ against the charge memo could be entertained only if the authority who issued it had no jurisdiction or authority or if an allegation of mala fides were raised or if the same was in violation of statutory rules in force.

“Even in raising of allegations of mala fides, the authority against whom such an allegation is raised ought to be impleaded as party respondent in his personal capacity. In the absence of any such legal grounds, no writ can be issued to quash the charge memo,” the judge said.

Rasu had contended that besides the initiation of departmental disciplinary proceedings on mala fide grounds, the inquiry officer has already submitted his report in January 2018. However, no final order has been passed despite the government guidelines issued in this regard to conclude the departmental proceedings within 180 days as specified by the government. Thus, on that ground too, the charge memo was liable to be quashed, he submitted.

However, holding that the allegations against the writ petitioner involving Rs 79.48 lakh were serious in nature, Justice Subramaniam said intermittent intervention by the courts on certain technical grounds were also causing greater impediments for the competent authorities in concluding the departmental disciplinary proceedings.

“This apart, the delinquent officials are also raising certain flimsy grounds in order to delay and dilute the departmental disciplinary proceedings. Such an attitude is to be carefully identified and courts are bound to deal with such cases by providing clear directions. In the event of allowing these delinquent officials to dilute the inquiry proceedings, the efficiency level of the public administration will undoubtedly be paralysed,” the judge said.