SATISH KUMAR ISHWARDAS GAJBHIYE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The factual conspectus of the matter revolves around the fact that the present petitioner is an Indian Police Service Officer of Odisha cadre belonging to 2002 batch who has challenged the legality and validity of the final judgment/order dated 10.8.2018 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A.No.2787/2018 which was transferred from Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack Bench, Cuttack. The petitioner, in the said Original Application, assailed the impugned memorandum of charges handed over to him vide Memorandum No.37589/IPS dated 07.11.2015 mainly on the grounds of lack of jurisdiction.

(2.) The memorandum dated 07.11.2015 was issued by the Home Department, Government of Odisha to initiate the Disciplinary Proceedings against the petitioner for the alleged violation of Rule-3 of the All India Services (Conduct) Rules 1968. As per the Article of Charges, issued by the Home Department, during the incumbency of the petitioner as Superintendent of Police (S.P) Malkangiri, on 25.07.2007 a hardcore militant Maoist was arrested. Thereafter, an amount of Rs. 3,55,000/- was sanctioned and remitted to the petitioner for making payment of Rs. 1,55,000/- to six Police personnel who were actually involved in the arrest as reward. The specific reward amount of each of these Police personnel was indicated and the balance amount to be paid to civilian informers. The complaints of the Police personnel for alleged non-receipt of the reward amount has been the main cause of action for the Director-Cum-ADG (Intelligence) to cause an inquiry against the present petitioner through the DIG (Intelligence) namely, Sri Sanjeeb Panda, IPS so as to find out as to whom the money has been disbursed and sought a detailed Preliminary Inquiry report by 30.08.2011. But the Disciplinary Authority has neither passed any such order for this inquiry nor has he been made aware about such an inquiry.

(3.) Being aggrieved by the said initiation of Preliminary Inquiry and subsequent initiation of Disciplinary Proceedings against the petitioner, he approached the Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack vide O.A.No.229/16 primarily on the ground of lack of jurisdiction seeking quashing of the proceeding. The O.A. was then transferred to Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi and numbered as O.A. No.2787/ 2018. After hearing the parties, the learned Bench of the CAT, New Delhi vide its order dated 10.8.2018 dismissed the O.A. stating that "the disciplinary proceedings are reaching the final stage, we do not find it appropriate to scuttle them at this stage. If the proceedings end up in any order adverse to the interest of the applicant, he can certainly challenge that raising all the grounds that range from theinitiation to the conclusion of the proceedings."The aforesaid observation of the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, New Delhi Bench trampled Petitioner's expectation on the order being inappropriate, hence he preferred the instant Writ Petition.