NARAYAN PRASAD SAH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ORDER Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are of the opinion that this writ petition should succeed on a short ground.

(2.) THE petitioner has been subjected to a departmental enquiry as a result of a vigilance charge and on the acceptance of the findings of the Enquiry Officer, he has been visited with major penalty of reduction in rank by reducing him in the pay scale. The undisputed fact is that no Presenting Officer has been appointed in the departmental enquiry and the Enquiry Officer himself has acted as the Presenting Officer to conclude the enquiry. Thus the Enquiry Officer has assumed the role of the prosecutor affecting the fairness of the enquiry proceedings.

(3.) IN that view of the matter, the mere fact that a vigilance charge was levelled against the delinquent officer as a result of using a decoy by itself is no answer to the petitioner 'sright to have a fair enquiry before he is found guilty of the charges levelled against him and is punished. The reasons that the charges are grave by itself is not enough that an enquiry tainted with bias should be allowed to be sustained. From the record it also appears that the disciplinary authority has acted without application of mind having assumed that all the charges against the delinquent have been proved notwithstanding the fact that the Enquiry Officer has only found the first two charges proved. and found that third charge is not proved.