Kamal Krishna Gautam vs Union Of India

L.Narasimha Reddy, J

The applicant, who was an officer of subordinate statistical service was issued charge memo dated 22.09.2017 with certain allegations. Earlier he

filed OA.643/2020. The principal ground alleged by him was that the inquiry cannot be proceeded in view of the lapse of time indicated in the

judgement of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Prem Nath Bali v. Registrar, High Court of Delhi & Another (2015)16 SCC 415. We,

however, declined to interfere with the charge memo but directed the respondents to conclude the proceedings within four months, since the applicant

has already retired.

In this OA the grievance of the applicant is that the respondents did not conclude the proceedings despite the specific directions issued by the

Tribunal.

We heard Sh.Prateek Tushar Mohanty, Learned counsel for the applicant and Sh. Hilal Haider, learned counsel for the respondents.

On the earlier occasion, we declined to interfere with the charge memo and we did not accept the plea of the applicant that the proceedings lapsed

on account of the passage of time. No doubt we directed, the respondents to conclude the proceedings within four months. The fact however remains

that soon after the disposal of the OA, covid-19 pandemic came into existence and that the functioning almost all the departments was crippled. The

respondents have also filed an application in OA.643/2020 for extension of time.

We therefore dispose of the OA directing the respondents that the disciplinary proceedings initiated against the applicant in charge memo shall be

concluded within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. There shall be no order as to costs.