Inordinate delay in departmental inquiry vitiates entire proceedings: HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has ruled that inordinate delay in initiating departmental proceedings is sufficient to vitiate the entire disciplinary action, as it creates room for allegations of mala fides, bias and misuse of power, besides causing serious prejudice to the delinquent officer in mounting his defense.

The ruling by Justice Harpreet Singh Brar of the high court came in the case where the petitioner-employee, chargesheeted in September 2014 just months before his retirement, was exonerated by the inquiry officer. Despite this, the punishing authority imposed a five per cent cut in his pension for one year in October 2018 “without assigning reasons for dissenting from the inquiry officer’s report”. The appellate authority too, the Bench noted, dismissed the appeal without dealing with the findings of the inquiry officer.

Justice Brar added the procedure established under the relevant rules and principle settled by the Supreme Court had crystalised the principle that “whenever the disciplinary authority disagrees with the inquiry authority on any article of charge then before it records its own findings on such charge, it must record its reasons for such disagreement.”

Justice Brar added the principles of natural justice demanded the grant of opportunity of hearing to a delinquent officer before the imposition of any punishment, once the punishing authority proposed to differ with the inquiry officer’s report. The failure to do so, coupled with the inordinate delay in issuing the chargesheet, rendered the disciplinary proceedings “illegal, arbitrary and an abuse of the process of law.”

Referring to the facts of the petition filed against the Punjab State Power Corporation Limited and other respondents, Justice Brar made it clear that the chargesheet in the case pertained to 2005-06 but was issued after eight years in 2014 without any justification for the delay.

“The delay of eight years in initiation of proceedings is bound to give room for allegations of bias, mala fides and misuse of power. Such delay is likely to cause prejudice to the delinquent officer in defending himself. Therefore, the delay and laches on the part of the employer in conducting departmental inquiry without any satisfactory explanation for the inordinate delay are sufficient to vitiate the entire disciplinary proceeding.

Allowing the petition, the high court quashed the punishment order and directed the respondent-Corporation to release all consequential benefits to the petitioner with six per cent interest per annum from the date of filing of the writ petition till the actual realisation of the amount.