SAPNA JAIN Vs. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) There are two reliefs claimed in this writ petition. First is for quashing of the memorandum and communication of the respondent No.1- University dated 14.10.2011 and 13.12.2011 whereby the petitioner has been asked to show cause as to why the departmental proceedings be not initiated against the petitioner. Second relief is for appointing of an investigating agency to look into the alleged tampering of the result of one student Mr. Pradeep Kumar in M. Phil course by the respondent No.3.

(2.) So far as challenge to the communications dated 14.10.2011 and 13.12.2011 is concerned, the writ petition is pre-mature because no chargesheet has been issued to the petitioner till date. These communications only show contemplation for issuing of chargesheet. Even if chargesheet is issued, Courts do not decide truth or falsity of the allegations, and which are decided by the Enquiry Officer. Chargesheet can only be quashed if there is lack of inherent jurisdiction in issuing of the same. I have had an occasion to consider this in the judgment in the case of Dr. Muhammad Iqbal Vs. Union of India and Ors. in W.P.(C) No.4222/2012 decided on 8.7.2013 wherein I have held as under:-

(3.) Therefore, the writ petition so far as challenge to the communications dated 14.10.2011 and 13.12.2011 is concerned is dismissed as being pre-mature inasmuch as departmental proceedings have yet not been initiated against the petitioner and no Article of Charges are being issued.