VIJAY SHANKAR PANDEY Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Anil Tiwari, Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Prakhar Mishra, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Upendra Nath Misra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the State of U.P. as well as Sri Raj Kumar Singh, learned counsel for opposite party no.1.

(2.) Through this petition, the petitioner has challenged the judgment and order dated 20.12.2013 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No.395 of 2012, contained as Annexure No.1 to the writ petition.

(3.) The facts giving rise to the present petition are that the petitioner was served with a charge sheet containing five charges on 22.7.2011. He raised certain objections to the charge sheet and also demanded all the correspondence and letters received from DOPT, various other departments and offices of Government of India to enable him to submit detailed reply to the charge sheet. Certain documents were provided by the State of U.P. on 2.12.2011. The petitioner submitted his explanation denying all the charges levelled against him. The disciplinary authority proceeded to appoint Mr. Jagan Matheus, IAS as the enquiry officer on 27.2.2012. The petitioner submitted his reply on 5.3.2012. The petitioner challenged the charge sheet before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad by means of O.A. No.623 of 2012, inter alia, on the ground that it was without jurisdiction as the same has been issued without approval of the competent authority i.e. Chief Minister on 25.5.2012. In the aforesaid O.A., an order was passed on 25.5.2012 by the Tribunal that case of the petitioner shall be considered by the Government of India for empanelment to the post of Secretary by not taking cognizance of the charge sheet but declined to stay the operation of the charge sheet. Finally, O.A. No.623 of 2012 was dismissed on 29.8.2012 granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all the pleas available to him in reply to the charge sheet and the disciplinary authority was directed to take decision on the same. The petitioner filed writ petition against the order dated 29.8.2012 but he got the writ petition dismissed as withdrawn subsequently. Thus the said order became final.