Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, a State Government Officer posted as Director of Dr. Punjabrao Deshmukh Vidarbha Administrative and Development Training Academy, Amravati, filed a criminal writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging certain communications and summons issued by the Anti-Corruption Department. The background involved a complaint of disproportionate assets allegedly filed by an employee against whom the petitioner, while serving as Municipal Commissioner of Akola Municipal Corporation, had initiated disciplinary proceedings. The petitioner claimed the complaint was false and retaliatory. The Anti-Corruption Department took cognizance and began issuing communications seeking information for an open enquiry. The petitioner contended that these actions violated the State Government Circular dated July 27, 2015, which laid down a specific procedure for conducting open enquiries against Group-A officers. According to the circular, the Director General of Anti-Corruption must first examine the case and obtain consent of the Secretary, Home Department, and thereafter the Additional Chief Secretary, Home Department, must obtain consent of the Head of the Administrative Department of the employee before submitting a proposal to the State Government. The petitioner argued that the consent of the Revenue Department, which is his administrative department, was not obtained, and that the earlier circular of March 3, 2015 which contained a deemed sanction clause, had been modified by the later circular. The petitioner relied on a communication dated October 29, 2024 from the Revenue Department to substantiate that no consent was given. The High Court issued Rule and heard the matter finally with the consent of both parties. The Additional Public Prosecutor waived notice for the respondents. The judgment is incomplete in the provided text, and no final decision or operative directions are available.
Headnote
A) Administrative Law - Procedural Compliance in Anti-Corruption Enquiries - Requirement of Prior Consent from Administrative Department before Initiating Open Enquiry against Group-A Officer - Government Circulars dated 27.07.2015 and 03.03.2015 - The petitioner, a Group-A State Government Officer, challenged the issuance of summons and notices by the Anti-Corruption Department for an open enquiry into disproportionate assets on the ground that the mandatory consent of the Head of the Administrative Department (Revenue Department) was not obtained as required by the Circular dated 27.07.2015. The Court examined whether the enquiry was lawfully initiated and considered the argument that the earlier circular's deemed sanction clause had been superseded. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the open enquiry initiated by the Anti-Corruption Department against the petitioner is in compliance with the mandatory procedural requirements of the Government Circular dated July 27, 2015, particularly regarding prior consent of the concerned Administrative Department.
Law Points
- open enquiry against Group-A officer requires prior consent of Administrative Department as per Circular dated 27.07.2015
- deemed sanction clause in earlier circular of 03.03.2015 modified by later circular
- procedural compliance mandatory before issuance of summons
