Service Law. Delay to conclude disciplinary proceedings and denial of service/terminal benefits on this ground inflicts mental agony. Karnataka High Court quashes enquiry proceedings against employee.
B.S.Ramaswamy vs State of Karnataka and Others. Writ Petition 5838/2020 decided on 13 January 2021. Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/361305/1/WP5838-20-13-01-2021.pdf
Service Law. Delay to conclude disciplinary proceedings and denial of service/terminal benefits on this ground is clear case of mental agony. Karnataka High Court quashes enquiry proceedings against employee.
Relevant paragraphs: 15. This Court notices with pain in umpteen number of cases where disciplinary proceedings are initiated by issuance of charge sheet and are not concluded within reasonable time and the employee against whom proceedings are pending is always kept on the tenterhooks of the proceedings and denied service and terminal benefits that would become available to him, but for the pendency and protraction of such proceedings apart from causing immense mental agony. It is not that the Government has not taken any steps to address this issue. The Government has issued official memoranda from time to time fixing time limits for conduct and conclusion of departmental enquiries. The relevant official memorandum of this kind was issued on 31.05.1997 wherein the maximum time limit for conclusion of a departmental enquiry against a Government servant was capped at 21 months. This came to be subsequently modified by another official memorandum dated 28.06.2001 capping the time limit for conclusion of the enquiry on its initiation to 9 months. The aforesaid official memoranda is again reiterated by another official memorandum issued on 09.11.2020. In terms of the afore-extracted official memoranda, enquiry proceedings against a delinquent employee is required to be completed within nine months from its initiation i.e., issuance of charge sheet.
16. Though the said official memoranda has been in existence, it is seldom followed by the State or its instrumentalities, most conspicuously seldom in the case at hand. Therefore, it has become imperative to issue a direction to the State and its instrumentalities to adhere to the timeline stipulated in the aforesaid official memoranda in its letter and spirit and not place the same in cold storage. Therefore, the State Government and all its instrumentalities shall adhere to the timeline stipulated in the aforesaid memoranda including departmental enquiries that are entrusted to the Lokayukta by the Government in terms of Rule 14-A of the KCS(CCA) Rules. Any deviation from the timeline stipulated can only be for reasons to be recorded in writing, failing which, there would be mushrooming of cases of the nature of the one that is at hand.
17. The petitioner retired on attaining the age of superannuation on 31.01.2012, on the ground that disciplinary proceedings are pending no terminal benefits are paid for nine long years for no fault of the petitioner and now under the guise of conduct of a denovo enquiry, the payment of any terminal benefit is further deferred driving a retired employee to insurmountable hardship and mental agony as he is denied any benefit after his retirement. It is a fit case where the second respondent has to be mulcted for dealing with its employee in the manner narrated hereinabove.
