H.C. MAHESH KUMAR Vs. GOVERNMENT OF NCT OF DELHI THROUGH COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, PHQ, MSO BUILDING, IP ESTATE, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The three applicants in the present Original Application filed by them under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, are Head Constable and Constables in Delhi Police. They have called in question order dated 10.10.2011 passed by Additional Deputy Commissioner of Police, Central District, Delhi, which came to be passed pursuant to direction given by this Tribunal in the earlier Original Application filed by them bearing OA No.4159/2010 decided on 25.05.2011, vide which the departmental enquiry earlier kept in abeyance has been ordered to be re -opened for its completion.

(2.) Brief facts of the case as projected in the pleadings of the parties and accompanying documents reveal that FIR No.123/03 u/s 384/411/34 IPC came to be registered against the applicants. While the applicants were facing trial in the FIR referred to above, an order dated 22.11.2005 came to be passed by the disciplinary authority to departmentally try them as well on the same set of allegations as were subject matter of the criminal case. The applicants challenged that order in OA No.1273/2006, and this Tribunal vide order dated 23.06.2006 ordered stay of the disciplinary proceedings. When the OA aforesaid was still pending, a similar case in OA No.2816/2008 in the matter of Sukhdev Singh & another v Government of NCT of Delhi & others, and other connected matters, came to be referred to a Larger Bench, and the Full Bench of this Tribunal vide order dated 18.02.2011 held that there was no illegality in the criminal trial and the departmental enquiry to go on simultaneously. However, it was held that in case, a police officer may be acquitted of the charges framed against him by the criminal court, and meanwhile the order inflicting punishment may have been passed against him, the matter shall have to be re -visited in the light of rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 (hereinafter to be referred as the Rules of 1980). The operative part of the order passed by the Full Bench reads as follows: 9. In view of the discussion made above, we hold that there is no bar, express of implied, in the Rules of 1980 for holding simultaneous criminal and departmental proceedings. However, in case departmental proceedings may culminate into an order of punishment earlier in point of time than that of the verdict in criminal case, and the acquittal is such that departmental proceedings cannot be held for the reasons as mentioned in rule 12, the order of punishment shall be re -visited. The judicial verdict would have precedence over decision in departmental proceedings and the subordinate rank would be restored to his status with consequential reliefs. 10. In view of our findings on the first issue, there would be no need to put on hold the final orders in departmental proceedings awaiting the decision of the criminal court. 11. The questions as referred to the Full Bench are answered as above. Registry shall list this matter for hearing before the Division Bench for any other submissions that may be made by the counsel representing the applicants. OA No.1273/2006 of the applicants, with connected matters, thereafter came to be disposed of vide order dated 14.03.2011 in terms of the order passed by the Full Bench in Sukhdev Singh (supra).

(3.) A significant development took place meanwhile, as the applicants were acquitted by the Metropolitan Magistrate (Central) -05, Delhi, vide order dated 28.06.2010. When on disposal of OA No.1273/2006, the department would proceed against the applicants departmentally and would not even consider the judgment of the criminal court acquitting them, yet another Application came to be filed by the applicant bearing OA No.4159/2010, which has been disposed of vide order dated 25.05.2011 after reproducing rule 12 of the Rules of 1980, with the following directions: 7. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and considered their submissions. In our considered view, this OA can be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the case of the applicants in the light of the aforesaid order of the Full Bench dated 14.03.2011 and the provisions contained in Rule 12 of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 and take an appropriate decision in the matter. We order accordingly. As the O.A. No.1273/2006 itself has been decided, the aforesaid interim order dated 23.06.2006 has merged in the main order and it will not have any future consequences. There shall be no order as to costs.