SUDHIR KUMAR RANGA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was appointed as a Registrar of the Debt Recovery tribunal ( for short, DRT ). He moved the present writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking dual relief (a) permanent absorption of the petitioner as registrar; and (b) quashing of the letter dated 18. 04. 2002 whereby the presiding Officer, DRT II withdrew the powers of the petitioner. The writ petition was disposed of on the first day itself, i. e. , 17. 05. 2002. The application was filed by the Presiding Officer, DRT seeking review / recall of the Order dated 17. 05. 2002 on account of misrepresentations by the petitioners. Notice was issued in the said application. It is at that stage it came to light that the very eligibility of the petitioner to be appointed to the post was in question as the appointment was made on fraudulent misrepresentations. The case was referred to Central Bureau of Investigation ( for short, CBI ).

(2.) THE CBI was asked to file progress report of the investigation since the matter involved the appointment to a quasi-judicial post. It was found that some part of the records were destroyed, which included the application filed by the petitioner and other candidates. Even this destruction was found to be contrary to the Manual of Destruction of Documents. The matter was referred to be inquired into by the Officer of sufficient seniority.

(3.) THE CBI on investigation filed a charge-sheet. The charge-sheet itself stated that the appointment letter issued to the petitioner had been fraudulently obtained. The charge-sheet was initially silent on the issue of collusion of any Officer from the Department or the manner as to how appointment letter was issued wrongly to the petitioner.