Vijai Prakash Shukla Vs UOI & Anr. (Delhi High Court)
The Delhi High Court examined a writ petition challenging an order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) which had declined to interfere with disciplinary proceedings initiated against the petitioner and directed completion of the inquiry within six months. The primary issues before the Court were whether non-compliance with the time limits under Rule 14(24) of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965 would vitiate the disciplinary proceedings, and whether the charge memorandum was invalid due to alleged non-application of mind or violation of Rules 14 and 20.
The petitioner, a senior officer who had served in various capacities and was later deputed to SEEPZ under the Ministry of Commerce, faced disciplinary proceedings initiated through a charge memorandum dated 21.05.2021. The charges related to alleged irregularities in tendering processes, contractor appointments, allocation of work, decisions on structural repairs, and allotment of premises during his tenure. The petitioner argued that the proceedings were vitiated due to delay, procedural violations, and improper initiation.
A central contention was that the inquiry was not completed within the six-month period prescribed under Rule 14(24), nor was any written extension obtained from the disciplinary authority. The petitioner asserted that this requirement was mandatory and that non-compliance rendered the proceedings invalid. He also argued that the Tribunal erred in allowing continuation of the inquiry and directing its completion within a further six months.
