Prescribed Time Limits for filing Appeal/Petition/Complaint etc., under different Acts/Rules:

Prescribed Time Limits for filing Appeal/Petition/Complaint  etc., under different Acts/Rules:

Under CCS [CCA] Rules

Actions	Time Limits
For submission of written statement of his defence to the charge sheet	Within 10 days of the receipt of Memorandum [Charge Sheet]
Period of limitation of Appeal	Appeal has to be preferred within a period of 45 days from the date on which a copy of the order appealed against is delivered to the applicant.  However, the Appellate Authority may entertain the appeal after the expiry of that period, if it is satisfied that the appellant had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal in time.
Time limit for disposal of Appeal	Not prescribed, however quicker disposal is insisted by the rules.
Exercising of Revisionary Power by the Appellate Authority	Within six months of the date of the order proposed to be revised. In case, however more than six months have elapsed from the date of the order to be reviewed, the question of recommending a revision by the P&T Board, should be taken up through the respective Heads of Circle and Administrative Officers.
Review of Punishment	Powers vested with the President, can be carried out at any time.
Submission of Revision Petition	An employee may prefer a revision petition to the Revising Authority without submitting an appeal.  If the Revising Authority to whom the revision petition has been preferred is the Appellate Authority, the revision petition should be submitted well before six months of the date of the order sought to be revised.  In so far as a petition for revision to the P&T Board/President is concerned, though CCS [CCA] Rules 1965 do not lay down any time limit, it would be advisable to prefer such petitions within six months of the date of the order sought to be revised.
Review of Suspension	Suspension shall not be valid after 90 days unless it is extended after review before the expiry of 90 days.

Under Consumer Protection Act, 1986:

Actions	Time Limits
For Filing  Complaint in Consumer Forum	The District Forum, the State Commission or the National Commission shall not admit a complaint unless it is filed within 2 years from the date on which the cause of action has arisen.  However, a complaint may be entertained after the period specified above if the complainant satisfies that the District Forum, The State Commission of the National Commission, as the case may be , that he had sufficient cause for not filing the complaint within such period.
Enforcement of the orders of Forum	When the order is not implemented, District Forum, State Commission or National Commission may order the attachment of the property of the person not complying. However, no attachment shall remain in force for more than three months at the end of which, if the non compliance continues, the property attached may be sold and out of the proceeds thereof, the District Forum of the State Commission or the National Commission may award such damages as it things fit to the complainant and shall pay the balance if any to the party entitled thereto.

Under Central Administrative Tribunal Act:

Actions	Time Limits
Time limit for filing an application before CAT	An application has to be filed within 1 year from the date on which the initial final order has been made.  Where an appeal/representation has been submitted in the matter and the authority competent to pass final order has not passed the said order, application has to be filed after the expiry of a period of six months from the submission such application/representation and within one year from the date of expiry of the said period of six months. Tribunal has power to admit an application in relaxation of the above limitation, if sufficient cause is shown, supported by an affidavit, for not making the application within the stipulated period.
Action Judgment	The order of the Tribunal is final and binding on both the parties.  It should be compiled with within the time-limit prescribed in the order or within six months of the receipt of the order, if no time-limit is prescribed.  Failure to implement the order in time may give rise to cause of action for initiating contempt proceedings.
Review Provision	If the applicant and/or the respondent are not satisfied with the judgment, it is open to them to seek review of the judgment by filing a petition within 30 days of the communication of the order.  Review petition would lie only when there is a glaring omission, paten mistake or grave error.  Once the review petition is dismissed, there is no provision for further review.  The matter has to be agitated before Hon.Supreme Court, through Special Leave Petition.

Jurisdiction of District Consumer Forum, State Commission and National Commission:

District Forum	Where the value of goods or services and compensation does not exceed Rs.20 Lakh.
State Commission	Where the value of goods or services and compensation is above Rs.20 Lakh, but below Rs.1 Core.
National Commission	Where the value of goods or services and compensation is above Rs.1 Core

DOPT ISSUED FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

DOPT published today on its official website regarding the 'Administrative Tribunals', the clarification is given as  ‘FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS’ and it placed under for your information…

FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS ON ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNALS

Q.1 What is the objective behind setting up of Central Administrative Tribunal? 

Ans. To provide in-expensive and speedy relief to Central Government Employees in respect of their grievances related to service matters.

Q.2 What are the jurisdiction of a Central Administrative Tribunal? 

Ans. CAT adjudicates disputes with respect to recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to public services and posts in connection with the affairs of the Union or other local authorities with the territory of India or under the control of Government of India and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.

Q.3 What are the qualifications for appointment as Chairman and other Members of the Tribunal? 

A person shall not be qualified for appointment as the Chairman unless he is, or has been, a Judge of a High Court.

Provided that a person appointed as Vice-Chairman before the commencement of this Act shall be qualified for appointed as Chairman if such person has held the office of the Vice-Chairman at least for a period of two years.

(2) A person shall not e qualified for appointment :-

(a) as an Administrative Member, unless he has held for at least tow years the post of Secretary to the Government of India or any other post under the Central or State government and carrying the scale of pay which is not less than that of a Secretary to the Government of India for at least two years or held a post of Additional Secretary to the Government of India for at least five years or any other post under the Central or State Government carrying the scale of pay which is not less than that of Additional Secretary to the Government of India at least for a period of five years :

Provided that the officers belonging to All India Services who were or are on Central deputation to a lower post shall be deemed to have held the post of Secretary or Additional Secretary, as the case may be, from the date such officers were granted proforma promotion or actual promotion whichever is earlier to the level of Secretary or Additional Secretary, as the case may be, and the period spent on Central deputation after such date shall count for qualifying service for the purpose of this clause:

(b) as a Judicial Member, unless he is or qualified to be Judge of a High Court or he has for at least two years held the post of a Secretary to the Government of India in the Department of Legal Affairs or the Legislative Department including Member-Secretary, Law Commission of India or held a post Additional secretary to the Government of India in the Department of Legal Affairs and Legislative at least for a period of five years.

Q.5 Where are the benches of Central Administrative Tribunals located?

Ans. There are 17 Benches of the Tribunal, located throughout the country wherever the seat of a High Court  located, with 33 Division Benches. In addition, circuit sittings are held at Nagpur, Goa, Aurangabad, Jammu, Shimla, Indore, Gwalior, Bilaspur, Ranchi, Pondicherry, Gangtok, Port Blair, Shillong, Agartala, Kohima, lmphal, Itanagar, Aizwal and Nainital.

Q.6 what are the limitations of admitting an application? 

Ans. As per Section 21 of the Administrative Tribunal Act. 1985 (1) A Tribunal shall not admit an application :-

(a) In a case where a final order such as is mentioned in clause (a) of sub-(2) of section 20 has been made in connection with the grievance unless the application is made, within one year from the date on which such final order has been made:

(b) In a e where an appeal or representation such as e mentioned in clause (b) of sub-section (2) of section 20 has been made and a period of six months had expired thereafter without such final order having been made within one year from the dale of expiry of the said period of six months.

(2) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1), where -

(a) the grievance in respect of which an application is made had arisen by reason of any order made at any time during the period of three years immediately preceding the date on whdi the jurisdiction, powers and authority of the Tribunal becomes exercisable under this Act in respect of the mater to which such order relates; and

(b) no proceedings for the readressal of such grievance had been commenced before the said date before any High Court,

the application shall be entertained by the Tribunal if it is made within the period referred to in clause (a), or. as the case may be. clause (b), of sub section (1) or within a period of six months from the said date. whichever period expires later.

3. Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) or sub-section(2). an application may be admitted after the period of one year specified in clause (a) or clause (b) of sub-section (1) or, as the case may be, the period of six months specified in sub-section (2), ¡f the applicant satisfies the Tribunal that he had sufficient cause for not making the application within such period.

Courtesy : http://90paisa.blogspot.in/

SLP filed in Hon. Supreme Court against Karnataka High Court decision on fixation of pay on promotion to PO & RMS Accountants dismissed

Despite our request not to file any SLP on the High Court Karnataka decision on fixation of pay of PO & RMS accountants on promotion, the Department has filed SLP in the Supreme Court as per the opinion of the Ministry of Finance. Now the supreme court has dismissed the SLP. Now the Department has no option except implement the Karnataka CAT and High Court decision. The Department should come forward to implement the decision to all the similarly situated persons.

Kudos to Karnataka Comrades.

The Supreme Court has fined Rs. 50000/- to Department

A remarkable and marvelous decision.

ITEM NO.9                   COURT NO.5                 SECTION IVA

S U P R E M E   C O U R T   O F    I N D I A

RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Civil)....../2012 CC 10080/2012

(From the judgement and order dated 18/11/2010 in WP No.7593/2003, of The HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BANGALORE)

CHIEF POST MASTER GEN.KARNATAKA CIR.& ORS                            Petitioner(s)

                   VERSUS

S. MOHAN KUMAR                                                                                         Respondent(s)

(With appln(s) for c/delay in filing SLP)

Date: 05/07/2012    This Petition was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G.S. SINGHVI

          HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUDHANSU JYOTI MUKHOPADHAYA

For Petitioner(s)         Mr.   R.P. Bhatt, Sr. Adv.

                          Mr.   Ashok K. Srivastava, Adv.

                          Ms.   B Sunita Rao, Adv.

                          Mr.   B. Krishna Prasad,Adv.(Not present)

For Respondent(s)

            UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following

                                O R D E R

              This petition filed for setting aside order dated 18.11.2010 passed by the Division Bench of the Karnataka High Court is accompanied by an application for condonation of 445 days delay.

            We have heard Shri. R. P. Bhatt, learned senior counsel representing the petitioners and carefully perused the averments contained  in the application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act and are convinced that there is no valid ground to accept the explanation offered by the petitioners for delayed filing of the special leave petition.

         We are further of the view that the Bangalore Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal did not commit any error by quashing the action taken by the petitioners to re-fix the respondent's pay on the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission and the High Court rightly declined to entertain the petitioners' challenge to the order of the Tribunal.

         Learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioners could not put forward any tangible argument to support re-fixation of the respondent's pay in the light of the recommendations of the Vth Pay Commission. Therefore, we do not find any valid ground to interfere with the impugned order.

         The special leave petition is accordingly dismissed on the ground of delay and also on merits.

         For filing a frivolous petition like the present one, the petitioners are saddled with costs of rupees fifty thousand which shall be deposited by them with the Supreme Court Legal Services Committee within a period of eight weeks from today. It will be open to the Central Government to recover the amount of costs from the officers responsible for taking wholly arbitrary and unjustified action for re-fixing the respondent's pay.

(Parveen Kr.Chawla)                                                                                    

Court Master                                                                                           

(Phoolan Wati Arora)             
Court Master

Government fixes 500-word limit for RTI query

The government has put a word limit of 500 words for filing an application under the Right to Information (RTI) Act.
Besides this, a new format has been devised for filing an appeal to the Central Information Commission under the transparency law.
The government has also made it mandatory for an appellant or his authorised representative to appear before the CIC either in person or through video-conferencing, according to new rules notified on July 31.
An application "shall be accompanied by a fee of rupees ten and shall ordinarily not contain more than five hundred words, excluding annexures, containing address of the Central Public Information Officer and that of the applicant," the new rules said.
Earlier, there was no word limit in seeking information. However, the rules said that "no application shall be rejected on the ground that it contains more than five hundred words".
According to a notification by the Department of Personnel and Training under the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, an applicant will have to pay additional postal charges "involved in supply of information that exceeds fifty rupees".
There will be no fee charged from a person below the poverty line for providing a copy of the certificate issued by the appropriate government in this regard, it said.
The RTI Act, which was enacted in 2005, covers disclosure of information on almost all matters of governance.
Source:-The Economic Times

LOKPAL: LAW MIN AGAINST POWER TO FILE CHARGE SHEET

New Delhi, August 12, 2012(PTI): Maintaining that it was against the “principle of protection”, the Law Ministry has opposed a provision in the Lokpal Bill which gives the ombudsman power to file charge sheet against a public servant without the prior sanction of competent authority.
“…The proposal to do away with the requirement of previous sanction…Where prosecution is proposed by Lokpal, would be against the principle of protection needed for the public servants,” the Ministry has told Rajya Sabha’s Select Committee scrutinising the Bill.

The Constitutional protection available to civil servants under Articles 311 and 320, clause 3(C) of the Constitution would also be adversely affected by the provisions of the proposed law, the Ministry said.
According to Chapter VII, clause 23 (1) of the Lokpal Bill, “no sanction or approval of any authority shall be required by the Lokpal for conducting a preliminary inquiry or an investigation on the direction of the Lokpal…Or for filing of any charge sheet or closure report on completion of investigation in respect thereof before the Special Court under this Act.”
The Law Ministry has also favoured changing a provision in the Bill to provide safeguards for officials of the Prime Minister’s Office so that they cannot be questioned by the anti-corruption watchdog on sensitive issues like national security and atomic energy.
It told the panel that there was a need to change the draft of the Bill to protect PMO officials from being questioned on sensitive issues on which the Prime Minister himself is exempted.
Asked whether the protection provided to the Prime Minister in the present bill on issues like national security, nuclear energy and public order covers his officials, the Ministry said “it applies to PM in person. The secretariat will be exposed (to probe) for that thing…”
When some panel members questioned that while the PM himself cannot be questioned on national security by the Lokpal, can his Principal Secretary be calledto make disclosures, Ministry officials said that in such a scenario the provision needs modification.
Ministry officials said the provision should be suitably changed and favoured a suggestion that the draft needs to be “cleaned up”. They also agreed with a suggestion that people who handle sensitive subjects should enjoy “immunity”.

SEXUAL HARRASSMENT OF WOMEN IN THE WORK PLACE – FAQ ON REMEDIAL MEASURES

SEXUAL HARRASSMENT OF WOMEN IN THE WORK PLACE – FAQ ON REMEDIAL MEASURES

1. Whether there is any Rule for Prohibition of Sexual harassment of Working Woman?

Yes Rule 3 C of CCS (Conduct) Rules, 1964 prohibits sexual harassment of any woman at her workplace.

2. What are the specific provisions of the Rule?

(1) No Government Servant shall indulge in any act of sexual harassment of any woman at her workplace.

(2) Every Government Servant who is in charge of a workplace shall take appropriate steps to prevent sexual harassment to any woman at such workplace.

Explanation: For the purpose of this Rule. ‘Sexual harassment’ includes such un-welcomed sexually determined behaviour whether directly or otherwise, as

(a) physical contact and advances;

(b) demand or request for sexual favour;

(c) sexually coloured remarks;

(d) showing any pornography; or

(e) any other unwelcome physical, verbal or non-verbal conduct of sexual nature.

3. What are the guidelines and norms to be mainintained to prevent and deal with cases of sexual harassment in working place?

The Hon’ble Supreme Court has laid down guidelines and norms in this matter in the case of Vishakha and Ors.Vs State of Rajasthan & Ors (Jt.1997(7) SC 384). These guidelines and norms to be observed to prevent sexual harassment of working woman have been circulated to all Ministries and Departments vide DOPT’s OM No.11013/10/1997-Estt.A dated 13.02.1998. A copy of these guidelines are available on the website of Ministry at WWW.permin.nic.in. As per the above guidelines, there should be complaints Committee, a special Counsellor or other support service including maintenance of confidentiality.

(DOPT’s O.M.dated 21.07.2009 and 7.8.2009)

4. What is the Composition of Committee?

The Complaints Committee should be headed by a woman and not less than half of its members should be women. Further, to prevent the possibility of any undue pressure of influence from Senior levels, such Complaints Committee should involve a third party, either NGO or other body who is familiar with the issue of Sexual harassment.

(enclosure of DOPT’s O.M. dated 13th Feb., 1998)

5. What about complaints against senior level officers?

For inquiring into complaints made against officers of the level of Secretary, Addl. Secretary and equivalent level of Govt. of India, a separate Complaints Committee has been set up by the Cabinet Secretariat with the approval of the Prime Minister.

(DOPT’s O.M.11013/10/97-Estt.A dated 13.07.2009)

6. What about Complaints against senior level officers?

For inquiring into complaints made against officers of the level of Secretary, Addl. Secretary and equivalent level of Govt. of India, a separate Complaints Committee has been set up by the Cabinet Secretariat with the approval of the Prime Minister.

(DOPT’s O.M. No.11013/3/2009-Estt.A dated 2nd Feb., 2009, Cab.Secretariat’s O.M.501/28/1/2008-CA.V dated 26.09.2008)

7. Whether separate Complaints Committee should be set up for each complaint of sexual harassment case?

No. It is necessary to have in place at all times an effective mechanism for dealing with cases of sexual harassment and to create awareness in this regard. There should be Standing Committee in each organization for inquiring into any such complaints. The Complaints Committee must make an Annual Report to the Government Department concerned of the Complaints and action taken by them. It would also be desirable of the Committees to meet once in a quarter even of there is no live case and review preparedness to fulfill all requirements of the Vishakha judgment in the Department/Ministry/Organisation concerned.

(DOPT’s O.M dated 21.07.2009, 07.08.2009, 3rd August 2009)

8. What is the status of the report of the Complaints Committee?

In its order dated 26.04.2004 in the Writ Petition No: 173-177/1999 in the case of Medha Kotwal and Ors.Vs UOI & Ors. the Hon’ble Supreme Court has directed that the Reports of the complaints Committee shall be deemed an enquiry Report under the CCS Rules. Thereafter, the Disciplinary Authority will act on the report in accordance with Rules. Sub-Rule (2) of Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 has accordingly been amended to provide that the Complaints Committee shall be deemed to be the Inquiry Authority for the purpose of these Rules by the Notification No. 11012/5/2001-Estt.A dated 01.07.2004 (GSR 225 dated 10th July, 2004). In view of the said amendment made to the CCS (CCA) Rules, the instructions contained in DOPT’s O.M.dated 12th Dec., 2002 stands modified and the report of the Complaints Committee should be treated as an inquiry report and not a preliminary report.

(DOP&T O.M. No.11013/3/2009-Estt. (A) Dated the 21st July, 2009]

[DOPT OM dated 12.12.2002 as amended by O.M. dated 4.8. 2005]

9. Is there any charge Sheet in such cases?

The Complaint forwarded by the DA to the Complaint Committee is treated as Charge Sheet. Specific Charge Sheet may also be made on the basis of complaints.

10. Is the procedure prescribed in the CCS (CCA) Rule 14 followed in such enquiries?

The Complaint Committee is the competent authority in such cases to decide the procedure. However, since the report of the committee is to be treated as the enquiry report under the CCS(CCA) rules and the Disciplinary Authority is to take action on that report as per the same rules (as mentioned at point 8 above) the procedure prescribed in Rule 14 of the CCS (CCA) Rules are to be followed as far as practicable. [DOP&T O.M.No.11013/3/2009-Estt.(A) dated 3rd August, 2009].

11. Whether copy of the report should be given to the Charged Officer / Complainant?

Yes, may be given.

12. Whether any special leave or transfer is to be granted to the complainant if such request is made by her?

As per existing Leave Rules, there is no special type of leaves that can be granted to the aggrieved woman. However, the can be granted any of regular leave that’s admissible to her under the provisions of CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972 (as amended from time to time). The victims of sexual harassment should have the option to seek transfer of the perpetrator or their transfer or their own transfer.

(DOPT’s O.M.No 11013/10/97-Estt.A dated 13th Feb., 1998)

13. Whether any amendment to the existing Rules / instructions is being made on this issue?

The existing Rules / Instructions / guidelines / norms / mechanisms have been formulated on the basis of direction of the Supreme Court in the case of Vishakha & Other vs. State of Rajasthan and Medha Kotwal Lele & Ors vs. UOI & Ors. as mentioned above. However, Ministry of Women & Child Development have introduced a Comprehensive Bill in the Parliament on the issue of sexual harassment at working place — Government, Semi-Government, Private Sector as well as unorganized sectors. After passing of the Bill in the Parliament detailed Rules vis-a-vis that Act may be formulated by the Government.-

Courtesy : http://katiharho.blogspot.in/

Three per cent quota in Government Service for the Disabled is only for initial appointments not for Promotions - Madras High Court

Three per cent quota in Government Service for the Disabled is only for initial appointments not for Promotions - Madras High Court

Three per cent quota in government service for the disabled is only for initial appointments, and the government cannot be directed to extend it for promotions, ruled the Madras High Court on Monday.

Dismissing a petition seeking a direction to the government to reserve three per cent for promotions to physically handicapped persons, Justice K. Chandru said: “The provisions are contemplated only for initial appointments and not for promotions. The petitioner has not made out any case to seek a direction to provide for reservation for the disabled persons in the matter of promotions in respect of State services.”

The writ petition was filed by the South Arcot Vallalar District Handicapped Welfare Association, represented by its president S. Shanmugam, seeking reservation for the disabled in promotions. If suitable employees were not available in a particular year, the unfilled posts could be carried over for the next three succeeding years.

When the matter was heard, the State Commissioner for the Disabled stated that there was no government policy to reserve three per cent of posts in promotions to be filled from the disabled category.

The disabled persons were considered only for the direct recruitment posts under three per cent reservation as per a G.O issued in 1981. Promotions were made in government departments based on seniority or transfer of service.

Mr. Justice Chandru said it could be seen from the G.O. that reservation for disabled persons was only horizontal and not vertical as contemplated in Article 16 of the Constitution.

He said that even in respect of the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, it was only by virtue of amendments made to the Constitution and by introduction of Article 16(4A) that the State had been empowered to make provision for reservation in promotion to any class or classes of posts in the service

Source: The Hindu, via gservants.com

Departmental, criminal proceedings can proceed at a time: HC

New Delhi, June 10, 2012: A government official can be made to face departmental disciplinary proceedings and trial for his alleged role in a criminal case simultaneously, the Delhi High Court has ruled, rejecting the plea of an IFS officer, facing the twin trouble. 

“The employer should not wait for the decision of the criminal court before taking anydisciplinary action against the employee and that such decision on the part of the employer does not violate the principles of natural justice,”said a bench of Justices Badar Durrez Ahmed and V K Jain, rejecting the plea of the IFS officer, allegedly involved in trafficking nine persons to Germany in 2005.

“It would, thus, be seen that there is no legal bar on disciplinary proceedings and criminal trial proceedings simultaneously, against the same person,” the bench added, citing various apex court’s decisions.

Rakesh Kumar, a 1972-batch officer of the Indian Foreign Service, had moved the high court for stay on the disciplinary proceedings against him till conclusion of the criminal trial against him saying that it would cause“grave” prejudice to him.

A local court yesterday framed charges for offences of criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery and corruption against Kumar and three others in the human trafficking case.

Kumar, the erstwhile director general with the Indian Council of Cultural Relations, had allegedly facilitated the trafficking of nine individuals to Germany under the guise of fake cultural group ‘Mehak Punjab Di’ by misusing his official position for extraneous considerations.

Justice Jain, writing the verdict, said “We… Find no reasonable possibility of any prejudice being caused to the petitioner, on account of the departmental proceedings being held simultaneously with the criminal trial.”

Source :  http://tkbsen.com 

Be cautious while quashing FIRs: HC

New Delhi, June 8, 2012(HT): Delhi High Court in a significant ruling has said that FIRs in certain criminal cases cannot be quashed immediately even if parties arrive at an out-of-court compromise. 

The court said it needs to be looked into if the decision would affect the peace and tranquillity in a particular locality. Justice ML Mehta said discretion must be exercised while compounding (allowing out of court settlement) offences which are a menace to residents of a particular area and embolden the “bad characters” there.

“Crimes are offences against the society. Its repercussions are inflicted upon every person who is a part of a civilised society. A settlement arrived between two parties in a criminal offence cannot become the touchstone for arriving at the decision of quashing the proceedings in such cases,” Justice Mehta said.

A FIR quashing a plea was filed by two “bad characters” in Najafgarh area after they arrived at a settlement with the victim. They were charged under Sections 323 (voluntarily causing hurt), 336 (act endangering human life) and 452(house trespass) of the Indian Penal Code filed by a property dealer Kanhiya Lal on May 5, 2012.

Lal alleged the two along with another person, while they were drunk, came to his office and entered into an altercation with him. One of them fired at a TV set, damaging it, while the other hit his head with a beer bottle and assaulted him. Dismissing the plea to quash the FIR, the court considered various factors.

The offence, it said, was serious in nature. The victim had done nothing to provoke them. The attack was not in self-defence or in the heat of the moment. The petitioner was the “bad character” of the area and feared by the people of the locality because of criminal antecedents. There are admittedly as many as eight FIRs lodged against him, including murder.

Courtesy : http://tkbsen.com/

Charge sheet can’t be quashed in a casual manner: SC

New Delhi, June 4, 2012 (PTI): A charge sheet filed in departmental proceeding cannot be quashed by courts unless it adversely affects the rights of the aggrieved employee, the Supreme Court has held. 

“In fact, charge sheet does not infringe the right of a party. It is only when a final order imposing the punishment or otherwise adversely affecting a party is passed, it may have a grievance and cause of action.

“Thus, a charge sheet or show cause notice in disciplinary proceedings should not ordinarily be quashed by the court,” said a bench of justices B S Chauhan and Dipak Misra, in an order.

The bench passed the order while disposing of an appeal by the Ministry of Defence challenging a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) order quashing the charge sheet against one Prabhash Chandra Mirdha in a two-decade old bribery case.

“Law does not permit quashing of charge sheet in a routine manner. In case the delinquent employee has any grievance in respect of the charge sheet, he must raise the issue by filing a representation and wait for the decision of the disciplinary authority thereon.

“In case the charge sheet is challenged before a court/ tribunal on the ground of delay in initiation of disciplinary proceedings or delay in concluding the proceedings, the court/ tribunal may quash the charge sheet after considering the gravity of the charge and all relevant factors involved in the case after weighing all the facts, both for and against the delinquent employee, and must reach the conclusion which is just and proper in the circumstance,” the bench said.

The bench said charge sheet cannot generally be a subject matter of challenge as it does not adversely affect the rights of the delinquent unless it is established that the same has been issued by an authority not competent to initiate the disciplinary proceedings.