Full Text
W.P.(C) 13653/2021 and CM APPL. 51722/2023, CM APPL.
62999/2024
Date of Decision: 18.02.2026 IN THE MATTER OF:
DR SUSHREE SWARUPA TRIPATY .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rakesh Tiku, Sr. Advocate along with Mr. Shekhar kumar Mr. S. S.
Tripathi Mr. Ashish and Mr. Monu kumar, Advocates.
Through: Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, CGSC for UOI.
Mr. Bhuvnesh Satija , Mr.Aniket Khanduri and Mr. Lokesh for R-2 to
4.
J U D G E M E N T
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J. (ORAL)
JUDGMENT
1. The petition is for the following reliefs: “(A) Issue a Writ/Writs/Order/Orders or Direction /Directions to the Respondent No.2 and 3/4 for taking action upon the report of the Fact Finding Committee (FFC) qua the issue of impugned CRM/BND Certificates, and/or KUMAR KAURAV (B) Direct the Respondent No.2/3/4 to produce the report of the Fact Finding Committee (FFC) qua the issue of impugned CRM/BND Certificates, and/or
(C) Direct the respondent/s not to delay further appropriate action in pursuance to the report of Fact Finding Committee (FFC) qua the issue of impugned CRM/BND Certificates and fix the responsibility against the appropriate person for not taking any action for the last two years in pursuance to the report, and/or
(D) Monitor the further action taken by the Respondents in pursuance to the report of Fact Finding Committee (FFC) qua the issue of impugned CRM/BND Certificates, until its conclusion, and/or (E) Pass such other further order/orders as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.”
2. Mr. Rakesh Tiku, learned senior counsel for the petitioner points out the communication dated 14.02.2022 made by the Under Secretary of the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (hereinafter ‘the CSIR’) to the Director of CSIR-National Physical Laboratory, stating therein that the Scientific Investigation Board (hereinafter ‘the SIB’) to recommend necessary punishment as per the CSIR guidelines on Ethics in Research and Governance, 2019. Mr. Tiku has certain objections with respect to the manner in which the CSIR is dealing with the petitioner’s complaint.
3. Learned counsel who appears for the CSIR, however, contends that after receipt of the aforesaid communication, a committee was constituted and the report of the SIB was called for. He has also placed on record the copy of the said report.
4. The Court, however, finds that when the recommendations were received by the CSIR in terms of the communication dated 14.02.2022, it should have been taken to its logical conclusion under an intimation to the petitioner.
5. Under the peculiar facts and circumstances it is directed that the CSIR to consider the report and to pass appropriate order after extending opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Let the entire material to be supplied to the petitioner. Let the decision be taken within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order passed today.
6. If the petitioner, thereafter, has any further grievance, he shall be at liberty to take appropriate recourse in accordance with law.
7. In view of the above, the petition along with pending applications stands disposed of.
PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J FEBRUARY 18, 2026 aks/mj