Delhi High Court
Baljinder Singh vs Union Of India & Anr. on 5 August, 2011
Author: Pradeep Nandrajog
A-10
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 5th August 2011.
+ W.P.(C) 5574/2011
BALJINDER SINGH ..... Petitioner
Through: Ms. Avni Singh, Advocate
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr.Rajinder Nishchal, Advocate.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
1. Whether the Reporters of local papers may be allowed to
see the judgment?
2. To be referred to Reporter or not?
3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J
1. With the consent of parties the writ petition is being disposed
of passing consent directions.
2. Pending initiation of disciplinary inquiry, vide order dated
14.12.2009 petitioner has been suspended. The suspension has been
continued from time to time and there is a dispute whether the
continuation of the suspension is as per law.
3. Charge sheet has been served upon the petitioner and the
inquiry officer is in the process of completing the inquiry.
WP (C) No. 1533/1998 Page | 1
4. Challenging his suspension and the continuation thereof, the
petitioner preferred a writ petition before Gauhati High Court and
during the pendency of the same he filed a writ petition in this Court
which was dismissed on 28.4.2011 when it was brought to the notice
that on the same cause a writ petition was pending in the Gauhati
High Court. For unexplainable reasons, the petitioner has withdrawn
the writ petition filed before the Gauhati High Court. Instant petition
has been filed challenging the continued suspension of the petitioner
as also the prayer that the departmental inquiry be completed
expeditiously.
5. We see no reason as to why the departmental inquiry should
not be completed within 6 months of the charge sheet being issued
and especially when the petitioner is co-operating.
6. Without adjudicating on the issue of the suspension of the
petitioner, with consent of parties, the writ petition stands disposed
of passing following consent directions:-
i) The petitioner shall appear on each and every date
notified by the inquiry officer and the inquiry officer would
not adjourn the inquiry and would complete the inquiry
and submit a report within a period of 6 weeks from
today.
ii) Since the petitioner is a Group 'A' Officer and advise from
UPSC would have to be obtained with respect to the
report of the inquiry officer, the respondent would send
the complete file of inquiry containing the charge sheet,
evidence (both oral and documentary) as also the report
of the inquiry officer to UPSC within a week of receipt of
WP (C) No. 1533/1998 Page | 2
the inquiry report.
iii) UPSC would tender the advise within 4 weeks of receipt of
the docket from the respondents and if UPSC does not
tender any advise within 4 weeks, the respondents would
proceed ahead with the matter by treating that UPSC has
to tender no advise.
iv) Final decision would be taken by the competent authority
not beyond 4 months from today.
7. No costs.
8. Dasti.
PRADEEP NANDRAJOG,J
SUNIL GAUR, J
AUGUST 05, 2011
pkb
WP (C) No. 1533/1998 Page | 3
