Prolonged Delay In Departmental Inquiries Unacceptable: HP High Court Quashes Case Against Retd Officer Accused Of Using Fake Caste Certificate

Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, while delivering the judgment, stated, "It is the duty of the employer to ensure that the departmental inquiry initiated against the delinquent employee is concluded within the shortest possible time by taking priority measures."

The court underscored the importance of adhering to prescribed timelines in disciplinary proceedings to prevent undue hardship to the employee.

The petitioner, a former Forest Range Officer, had been placed under suspension just two months before his retirement in April 2016, following the issuance of a charge sheet by the Forest Department.

Although the Inquiry Officer submitted the inquiry report to the Disciplinary Authority in May 2022, no further action was taken, leading to a protracted delay that lasted over eight years from the initiation of the proceedings.

Justice Goel noted that the respondents' failure to act on the inquiry report and their subsequent correspondence seeking additional information from various field offices was contrary to the provisions of Rule 15 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1965.

This rule mandates that the Disciplinary Authority, upon receiving the inquiry report, must either remit the case back to the Inquiring Authority for further investigation or forward the report to the delinquent officer with any tentative reasons for disagreement.

The court further observed that the prolonged delay in concluding the departmental inquiry had caused undue hardship to the petitioner, depriving him of his rightful retiral benefits for an extended period.

The court invoked Prem Nath Bali v. Registrar, High Court of Delhi to emphasize that disciplinary proceedings must be resolved within a reasonable timeframe, highlighting the harmful effects that such delays can have on an employee's rights.

In Prem Nath Bali v. Registrar, High Court of Delhi, the Supreme Court underscored that disciplinary inquiries must be concluded within a reasonable period, ideally within six months and no more than a year under exceptional circumstances, to prevent undue hardship and protect the rights of employees.

Given the undue delay and the procedural lapses on the part of the respondents, the court quashed the departmental proceedings against the petitioner, including the suspension order.

Consequently, the court directed that all retiral benefits due to the petitioner be released immediately, along with statutory interest. The suspension period was also ordered to be treated as time spent in service for all purposes.

Case Title: Varinder Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh and others

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (HP) 44

Click Here To Read/Download Judgement