A division judge bench of the Justice Vipin Sanghi and R.C. Khulbe of Uttarakhand HC has held that this court is not competent to issue mandamus with respect to directing state from framing timeline for conclusion of disciplinary proceedings against the government servant and direct disciplinary committee to reach a conclusion within next 3 months.
Facts:
The petitioner is seeking a mandamus to direct the Respondent State to suitably amend the Uttarakhand Government Servant (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 2003, so that the dignity & rights of Government Servants are protected by prescribing a timeline for the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Government Servants along with a separate Review Committee established to review the orders, especially for Government Servants placed under suspension.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the primary grievance of the petitioner is with regard to the pendency of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him. He submits that the enquiry has been completed by the Enquiry Officer, and the report has been submitted before the Disciplinary Authority. He submits that the Disciplinary Authority should be required to complete the enquiry, and take a decision in the matter on an early date.
On the other hand, counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, points out that the petitioner himself had sought an adjournment, as is evident from the communication dated 23.07.2022 addressed to the petitioner by the Enquiry Officer.
Observations of the Court:
The court find out that since the matter is at the ex parte stage, and we have not called for the counter affidavit of the respondents, we proceed to dispose of this Writ Petition on the basis of the statements made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the Enquiry Officer has concluded the enquiry, and submitted the enquiry report to the Disciplinary Authority. The court that if that be the case, the Disciplinary Authority may proceed in accordance with law to bring the enquiry proceedings to its logical conclusion within the next three months, provided the petitioner cooperates, and does not delay the further proceedings in the matter.
The Court refused to issue mandamus with respect to directing state from framing timeline for conclusion of proceedings as such a direction cannot be issued by the Court. It is for the State to formulate its policies and, on that basis, to legislate on the subjects, over which it has legislative competence.
Decision:
The present writ petition was disposed by refusing the grant of mandamus, a relief sought by the petitioner and directed Disciplinary Authority to proceed in accordance with law to bring the enquiry proceedings to its logical conclusion within the next three months subject to cooperation of the petitioner.
Case: Dr. Ashok Kumar v. State of Uttarakhand and others
Citation: WRIT PETITON (S/B) No. 607 OF 2022
Coram: Justice Vipin Sanghi and R.C. Khulbe
Dated: 20.10.2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
