1 2025:CGHC:1917 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 202 of 2025 1 - Manku Ram Dhruw S/o Late Shri P.R. Dhruw Aged About 61 Years Presently Posted As Joint Director, Prosecution O/o Director, Public Prosecution R/o E-2/26, Sector -17, Atal Nagar, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Nava Raipur, District- Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Petitioner versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Home/police, Mahanadi Bhawan, Mantralay, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh 2 - Director Office Of Director, Department Of Public Prosecution, Indravati Bhawan C-Block, 4th Floor, Atal Nagar, Police Station And Post Rakhi, New Raipur, District Raipur (Chhattisgarh) 3 - Enquiry Officer/commissioner Department Enquiry, Office Of Commissioner, Indravati Bhawan, Police Station And Post Rakhi, Atal Nagar, New Raipur, District Raipur, Chhattisgarh ... Respondent(s) (Cause-title taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. Syed Majid Ali, Advocate For State/Respondent(s) : Ms. Shailja Shukla, Dy. Government Advocate Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Digitally signed by RAVI SHANKAR MANDAVI Date: 2025.02.12 11:38:12 +0530 2 Order on Board 13/01/2025 1. Heard Mr. Syed Majid Ali, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. Shailja Shukla, learned Dy. Government Advocate for the respondent/State. 2. By this petition, this petitioner has sought following relief : “10.1 That, this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to pass final order pursuant to the inquiry report dated 06.04.2022 within a stipulated time period as the petitioner is due to retire in Month of May-2025 i.e. 31.05.2025. 10.2 That, this Hon'ble Court further pleased to grant such other relief(s) as may be granted fit and proper in the interest of justice.” 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was appointed as Assistant District Prosecution Officer in the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh in year 1996. As having excellent service record and on the basis of his outstanding ACRs he was promoted to the post of District Prosecution Officer in year 2005 and thereafter Deputy Director, Department of Public Prosecution in year 2010 and lastly he was promoted to the post of Joint Director in year 2016 and presently he is holding the post of Joint Director, Department of Public Prosecution, however, while working on the post of Joint Director, Department of Public Prosecution, the petitioner was issued with bogus charges sheet 3 with a single charge that that his was negligence to work. Thereafter Inquiry Officer and Presenting Officer were appointed and after marathon hearings in the inquiry, the departmental inquiry could not be completed for a single charge for more than 4 years. Whereupon, the petitioner approached this Hon'ble Court by preferring a Writ Petition (S) No. 6816/2021 to conclude the inquiry and the said writ petition was disposed of by this Hon'ble Court wherein the directions were issued to conclude the inquiry within 4 months. In compliance of the same, the petitioner made a representation before the respondent authorities. After the directions of the Hon'ble High Court the Inquiry Officer concluded the inquiry and the inquiry report was submitted on 06.04.2022. Thereafter more than 2 ½ years have been passed by the Competent Authority i.e. the Authority who had issued charge sheet has failed to pass final orders either exonerating the petitioner or imposing any penalty. The act of lethargic approach of the Disciplinary Authority can very well seen by their conduct which speaks in volume that even after submission of inquiry report in year 2022 the Disciplinary Authority under Rule 15 which deals with action on inquiry report had failed to pass any final order. It is further submitted that, Rule 15 of Chhattisgarh Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1966 deals with action on the inquiry report the Rule 15 is reproduced as under for the ready reference of this Hon'ble Court : (15). Action on the inquiry report.- 4 (1) The disciplinary authority if it is not itself the inquiring authority may, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, remit the case to the inquiring authority for further inquiry and report and the inquiring authority shall thereupon proceed to hold the further inquiry according to the provisions of rule 14 as for as may be. (2) The disciplinary authority shall, if it disagrees with the findings of the inquiring authority on any article of charge, records its reasons for such disagreement and record its own findings on such charge, if the evidence on record is sufficient for the purpose. (3) If the disciplinary authority having regard to its finding on all or any of the articles of charge is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in [x x x ] rule 10 should be imposed on the Government servant, it shall, notwithstanding any thing contained in rule 16, make an order imposing such penalty [but in doing so it shall record reasons in writing;] Provided that in every case where it is necessary to consult the Commission, the record of the inquiry shall be forwarded by the disciplinary authority to the Commission for its advice and such advice shall be taken into consideration before making any order imposing any penalty on the Government servant. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contended that as per Rules which has been framed in exercise of powers conferred under the Article 309 of Constitution of India it is crystal clear that the Disciplinary Authority may defer with the inquiry report or accept the same and pass final order but in the present case the Disciplinary Authority failed to pass any final order which is arbitrary and illegal. The primary purpose of any inquiry, especially 5 within the context of administrative or organizational governance, is to uncover the truth surrounding a particular matter or incident to uncovering fact evidence is recorded and on the basis of the same the Competent Authority assesses the entire material and thereafter in a transparent manner authority is likely to pass a final order after all over evaluation of material on record. The inquiries are governed by principles of fairness and impartiality in addition to principles of opportunity of hearing. The departmental inquiries are not ment to harass, intimidate, or unjustly target any individual. Instead, they provide an opportunity for the subject of the inquiry to present their side of the story, clarify their actions, and respond to allegations with supporting evidence. But in the present case the action or in other words inaction of the respondents speaks in volumes, as the inquiry for single charge is pending since more than 7 years. 5. The departmental enquiry was initiated against the petitioner and thereafter, entire proceedings of departmental enquiry has been concluded, only final verdict has to be passed, however it is pending since 06.04.2022, by which the disciplinary authority has not finalized the case as such, a suitable direction is required to be passed. 6. Learned counsel for the State submits that if the matter is like that as the petitioner has projected, then the Departmental Enquiry would be concluded within a short period. 6 7. After considering the arguments advanced by the parties and after going through the documents appended with the petition, it is quite vivid that even after completion of departmental enquiry, the final order has been kept pending since 06.04.2022. 8. Recently, the State of Chhattisgarh has issued a Circular dated 27.06.2024 by which it has been directed that the departmental enquiry should be concluded within one year. 9. Without there being any reason the D.E. can not prolonged for indefinite period and it should be concluded within a reasonable period. 10. In the light of order dated 27.06.2024, the respondents are directed to pass final order within two months, as according to the petitioner entire departmental enquiry has been completed and only final verdict has to be passed. 11. The respondents are further directed to send a compliance report to the Registrar Judicial of this Court forthwith. 12. With the aforesaid observation and directions, the instant petition is disposed of. Sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Ravi Mandavi