Case Note & Summary
The matter arose from two writ petitions filed by a Civil Judge Junior Division challenging orders dated 15-07-2016 by which the Registrar General of the High Court communicated the decision to hold regular departmental enquiries against him. The petitioner was appointed as a Civil Judge Junior Division and was serving at Bhokardan, District Jalna, and later at Ajara, District Kolhapur. In the first petition, a complaint was received from one Mr. Teple regarding the petitioner’s tenure at Bhokardan, alleging misconduct including fabricating rent receipts, submitting false medical reimbursement claims using a forged ANC card, and making false statements regarding leave permissions. The Principal District Judge forwarded the complaint, and a fact-finding enquiry was conducted. After a show cause notice and the petitioner’s reply, the Disciplinary Committee decided to hold a regular enquiry. In the second petition, information was received about an incident on 16-07-2015 where the petitioner allegedly assaulted a school bus driver and threatened the driver and vehicle owners with criminal prosecution under Section 307 IPC and four days’ detention. A discreet enquiry was conducted by the District Judge-3, Kolhapur, who recorded statements and submitted a report. The Disciplinary Committee directed issuance of a show cause notice, and upon considering the reply, decided to initiate a regular departmental enquiry. Charges included assault, abuse, threats, and misuse of official position to make witnesses withdraw statements. The common question raised in both petitions was whether the departmental enquiry could be commenced in the absence of a written complaint supported by an affidavit, in alleged breach of guidelines issued by the Chief Justice of India on 31-10-2014 and modified on 16-03-2017. The petitioner contended that the guidelines mandated such an affidavit as a prerequisite. The High Court heard arguments and reserved judgment on 25-04-2018, pronounced on 04-05-2018. The excerpted text does not include the final decision or reasoning of the court.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Departmental Enquiry - Initiation of Disciplinary Proceedings - Compliance with Chief Justice of India Guidelines dated 31-10-2014 and modified on 16-03-2017 - Requirement of Written Complaint Supported by Affidavit - The Petitioner, a Civil Judge Junior Division, challenged orders directing regular departmental enquiry on multiple charges including misconduct, assault, and misuse of position. The core legal question was whether the enquiry could commence without a written complaint supported by an affidavit, as per the guidelines issued to ensure uniformity in processing complaints against subordinate judiciary. The Court heard submissions and reserved judgment on 25-04-2018. Held, that the matter is under consideration, awaiting final determination on the legality of the procedure adopted. (Paras 1-9)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Departmental Enquiry could be commenced against the Petitioner in the absence of a written complaint supported by an affidavit?
Final Decision
The High Court reserved judgment on 25-04-2018 and pronounced it on 04-05-2018, but the full reasoning and final order are not included in the provided text.
Law Points
- departmental enquiry can be commenced only after written complaint supported by affidavit as per CJI guidelines
- compliance with Maharashtra Civil Services (Disciplinary and Appeal) Rules 1979 Rule 8(5)(c)
- requirement of preliminary fact-finding enquiry
