Allegations Of Nepotism, Corruption Against DRT Lucknow Presiding Officer: High Court Directs DRAT Chairman To Submit Report To Central Govt

The Allahabad High Court has directed the Chairman, Debt Recovery Appellate Tribunal Allahabad to submit a preliminary report under Rule 9(1) of the Tribunal (Condition of Services) Rules, 2021 to the Central Government against the allegations of nepotism and corruption levelled against Mr. A. H. Khan, Presiding Officer, Debt Recovery Tribunal Lucknow.

Petitioner, Debt Recovery Tribunal Bar Association, alleged that the Presiding Officer had been arbitrary and whimsical in passing orders. It was alleged that he was not following due procedure established in law while passing orders but was indulging in “nepotism and corruption”.

The Court observed that due to lawyers of the Bar Association abstaining from work, the litigants were suffering. One such litigant approached the High Court wherein orders were passed directing the Bar Association to cooperate with the proceedings of the DRT. It was directed that if there are any issues, same may be taken up with the DRAT Chairman.

Subsequently, orders were passed noting that the working of DRT had resumed with cases being disposed of. The Court observed that the DRAT Chairman had advised the Presiding Officer, DRT to treat all lawyers equally and to be amicable in Court. Eventually, the writ petitions were declared infructuous as no further orders were required at that time.

The Court observed that since serious allegations were made against the Presiding Officer, DRT in the writ petition under consideration, counter affidavit from all respondents was called seeking their specific responses on the allegations against the Presiding Officer.

The Court observed that a letter was sent by the Central Government to the Chairman, DRAT Allahabad to look into the grievances of the DRT Bar Association against the Presiding Officer under Provisions of Rule 9(1) of the Tribunal (Condition of Services) Rules, 2021. However, the letter issued by the Central Government was not complied with by the Chairman, DRAT.

Accordingly, the bench of Justice Sangeeta Chandra and Justice Shree Prakash Singh directed the Central Government to “insist upon a Preliminary Scrutiny to be conducted with regard to various allegations made against the Presiding Officer, DRT, Lucknow, and for a detailed report to be submitted to it.”

The report to the Central Government is to be submitted by the Chairman, DRAT Allahabad in terms of the Tribunal (Condition of Services) Rules, 2021.

Case Title: Debt Recovery Tribunal Bar Association Thru. Its Secy. Arvind Kumar Srivastava vs. Union Of India Ministry Of Finance, Deptt. Of Financial Services Thru. Secy. And 3 Others 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 434 [WRIT - C No. - 7725 of 2022]

Case citation: 2024 LiveLaw (AB) 434

Click Here To Read/Download Order