PEOPLES UNION FOR CIVIL LIBERTIES Vs. M KHALILULLAH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PEOPLES Union for Civil Liberties has filed the present Public Interest writ Petition seeking issue of Mandamus to direct Union of India, respondent No. 2, to initiate disciplinary proceedings against Dr. M. Khalilullah, respondent No. 1.

(2.) THIS is the second round of litigation as a public interest writ petition filed by the petitioner praying for similar reliefs. The petitioner had earlier filed Writ Petition Civil No. 3032/1994, which was disposed of by judgment dated 26th May, 1995 reported in 1995 III AD (Delhi) 173. The relief prayed for in the petition and directions issued by the Court have been referred to in detail in subsequent portion of this judgment. However, at this stage, it will be suffice to notice that in the said judgment the Court had interdicted respondent No. 1, Dr. M. Khalilullah from functioning as a Director of G. B. Pant Hospital. Union of India was also called upon to take a decision whether or not to initiate disciplinary action against respondent No. 1, Dr. M. Khalilullah and decide whether it would be necessary or desirable to place him under suspension.

(3.) DR. M. Khalilullah, respondent No. 1 had filed a Special Leave petition before the Supreme Court, which was disposed of on 5th June, 1995 upholding the directions given by the High Court that the respondent No. 2 union of India should consider and decide in accordance with law whether it was necessary to initiate disciplinary proceeding against respondent No. 1, dr. M. Khalilullah but without being influenced by any of the observations made by the High Court. The Supreme Court noticed that while the said writ Petition was pending before the High Court, the matter was entrusted and was pending investigation by Central Bureau of Investigation. Learned counsel appearing for respondent No. 1, Dr. M. Khalilullah had stated before the Supreme Court that Dr. M. Khalillullah would proceed on leave till 15th june, 1995 to enable the Government to take an independent decision. . However, in case Union of India decided not to initiate disciplinary proceedings against respondent No. 1, Dr. M. Khalihillah the direction to interdict him from functioning as a Director should not be given effect to and in case disciplinary proceedings were decided to be initiated, the interdiction direction would take effect from 15th June, 1995.