AMIT CHAKRAPANI Vs. DAV COLLEGE MANAGING COMMITTEE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSPITE of a catena of judgments of the Supreme Court, as well as this Court, that when departmental enquiry commences, the charged employee cannot rush to the court for seeking quashing of the charges inasmuch as merits of the issues are determined at the conclusion of the enquiry by the departmental authority, however, certain litigants in order to delay and drag the departmental enquiries, do this, one such person being the petitioner against whom article of charges have been issued with respect to financial misappropriation running into lacs of rupees.

(2.) WITH respect to the aspect that the courts of law should not be approached at the stage of issuing of the charge -sheet notice on the ground of lack of jurisdiction or some other equal issue has been decided by me in the case of Dr.Muhammad Iqbal Vs. Union of India and Ors. in W.P.(C) No.4222/2013 on 08.7.2013 wherein I have referred to the judgments of the Supreme Court and held that the departmental enquiries cannot be scuttled by challenging the same at the stage of issuing of the charge -sheet. The relevant paras of the said judgment read as under: -

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner very strenuously argues that the impugned memorandum of charges dated 29.9.2014 issued against the petitioner is without jurisdiction by placing reliance upon Rule 38 sub -Rule 25(i) of the Statute isused under the Maharshi Dayanand University Act, 1975 (in short 'the Act') under which the respondents' college is functioning. Relying upon this Rule 38 sub -Rule 25(i) of the Statute, it is argued that this sub Rule requires that the governing body/Managing Committee has to be one which is approved by the university and since in this case the governing body/Managing Committee has not been approved by the university as shown from the reply given to an RTI query on 22.8.2014 (filed as Annexure P -3 to the writ petition) hence the departmental proceedings should be quashed. What is therefore argued is that the governing body/Managing Committee which has issued the memorandum of charges dated 29.9.2014 is not a governing body/Managing Committee as it has not been approved by the university in terms of the Rule 38 sub -Rule 25(i) of the Statute, and hence the said body was incompetent to issue the memorandum of charges.