RAJENDRA SINGH SISODIA Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner is challenging the judgment dated 28.11.2008 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Original Application No. 241/07, whereby, the learned Tribunal dismissed the original application filed by the petitioner and further directed that the respondents shall finalize the departmental proceedings within six months from the date of receipt of copy of the order as the incident mentioned in the charge-sheet related to the year 1995. Applicant-petitioner was also directed to cooperate with the disciplinary proceedings fully.

(2.) As per brief facts of the case, the petitioner was charge-sheeted under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (CCA) Rules, 1965 vide charge memo dated 16.08.2007. In the charge-sheet, three articles of charges against the petitioner relating to the incident of year 1995, in respect of which a criminal case was also registered and the relied documents as appended as a list with the charge-sheet also are same as of the criminal case including the FIR.

(3.) The petitioner is an employee of the Income Tax Department working since 1995. The alleged misconduct for which charge-sheet was issued to the petitioner vide memorandum dated 16.08.2007 relates to criminal case also. The C.B.I. Registered an FIR on 26.04.1995 in which challan was filed and, subsequent to trial of the said criminal case, he was acquitted by the C.B.I. Court. After acquittal, the respondent department sought explanation from the petitioner vide show-cause notice dated 04.02.2003 as to why disciplinary proceedings should not be initiated against him. The petitioner filed his explanation vide communication dated 04.02.2003 and denied all the allegations in detail and being satisfied after considering the explanation submitted by the petitioner, the disciplinary authority concluded that this is not fit case for initiating disciplinary proceedings as the action being regular and bona fide having no mens rea. With the above observation it was recommended by the disciplinary authority that no disciplinary action is required against the petitioner.