INDRA DEV TIWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) R. H. Zaidi, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Govind Saran, learned counsel appearing for the respon dents.

(2.) BY means of present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, petitioner prays for a writ, order or direc tion in the nature of mandamus command ing the respondents to stay the departmen- talproceeaings initiated by chargesheet dt. 8-8-1996 till the decision of. the criminal case started on the basis of the first informa tion report dt. 16-7-1996 against him.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that it was obligatory upon the authority concerned to stay the disciplinary proceedings till criminal case was not finally decided. In support of his submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the decision in the case of the Sunderrajan and another v. Unit Trust of India and another, 1993 (3) SLR-21. In the said case the apex court of the country was pleased to pass the following order: "order Delay condoned. Special leave granted. Heard parties. We have perused the records. We are of the view that the departmental enquiry should be stayed till the trial which is stated to be pending in the Court of the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Madras is completed. The enquiry shall accordingly stand stayed. How ever, it will be open to the respondents to proceed with the enquiry, if they so choose, after the THal Court has rendered its judgment, whether or not any appeal is taken from that judgment to a higher court. We are told that the trial has been pending since May, 1989and many witnesses have already been examined. Accordingly we except the Trial Court to complete the trial with in three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the circumstances, the appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs. Order accordingly. "