UNION OF INDIA Vs. DWIPENDRA NATH SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India appearing on behalf of the petitioners, and Mr. S. Dutta, learned counsel appearing for the sole respondent.

(2.) This writ petition is filed by the petitioners being aggrieved with the order dtd. 7/11/2017, passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Guwahati Bench, Guwahati, in O.A. No. 040/00295/2015. By the said order, the Original Application filed by the applicant/respondent herein has been allowed and the Memorandum of Charge dtd. 20/2/2015 has been set aside, while concluding that the Memorandum of Charge was served upon the respondent after inordinate delay of four years. In the aforesaid order it is also observed that no satisfactory explanation was given for the aforesaid delay; no action for cancellation of the related appointments was taken; the Charge Memo was served upon the respondent only four days before the retirement of the applicant/respondent herein and the omission and commission stated in the charge sheet being procedural in nature. The operative portion of the impugned order is reproduced hereunder: "7. In our considered opinion, in view of the charge sheet having been served after inordinate delay of 4 years and satisfactory explanation is not being given for the said inordinate delay and for the alleged irregularities no action for cancellation of the related appointments having been taken and charge sheet having been served only 4 days before the retirement of the Applicant and in view of the allegations of omission and commission stated in the charge sheet being of procedural in nature, and thus in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in catena of cases, the impugned charge memo requires to be set aside."

(3.) Assailing the impugned order, Mr. R.K.D. Choudhury, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners has argued that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has categorically held that a departmental proceedings initiated against a government employee cannot ordinarily be set aside on the ground of delay in initiation of departmental proceedings without looking into the gravity of the charges.