Dinesh Singh v. Union of India

1. On the previous date i.e., 19.01.2022, we had passed the following order in the above-captioned application: “1. Mr A. S. Singh, who appears on behalf of the petitioner/applicant, says that since the inquiry officer has submitted the inquiry report, albeit on 30.03.2021, all that the petitioner seeks, in the form of direction, is that the disciplinary authority should take a decision, one way or another, within the stipulated timeframe.

2. The writ petition is directed against the order dated 22.08.2019, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal [in short the “Tribunal”] in O.A. No.2772/2017, wherein the operative directions issued were that the inquiry should be completed within a period of six months.

3. Given this position, we are prima facie of the view that a direction can be issued to the disciplinary authority to take a decision in the matter within a stipulated timeframe, with liberty to the petitioner to assail the decision of the disciplinary authority, if it is adverse to his interest based on the grounds 2022:DHC:548-DB W.P (C) No.13259/2019 Pg. 2 of 3 raised in the O.A., as also the grounds taken in the writ petition.

4. Mr Hanu Bhaskar, who appears on behalf of the respondents, says that he will take instructions in the matter.

4.1. Mr Singh says that he will do likewise.

5. List the matter on 11.02.2022.

6. In the meanwhile, Mr Singh will furnish a copy of the case papers, including the above-captioned application to Mr Bhaskar during the course of the day, albeit, via e-mail."

2. Pursuant to the aforementioned order, Mr Hanu Bhaskar, who appears on behalf of the respondents, has reverted with instructions.

2.1. Mr Bhaskar says that the final decision will be taken by the disciplinary authority qua the petitioner, within the next six months commencing from today.

2.2. The statement of Mr Bhaskar is taken on record.

3. The above-captioned application is, thus, disposed of, in view of the statement made by Mr Bhaskar above. However, it would be open to the petitioner to raise any objections vis-a-vis the final decision taken by the disciplinary authority, including the objection with regard to delay, albeit, as per law. W.P.(C) 13259/2019 & CM APPL.53914/2019[Application filed on behalf of the petitioner for interim relief]

4. Both Mr R.V. Sinha, who appears on behalf of the petitioner, and Mr Bhaskar say that the writ petition and the pending application can be closed, having regard to the order passed in CM No.3175/2022.

4.1. It is ordered accordingly.

5. Resultantly, the date fixed in the matter i.e., 09.05.2022 shall stand cancelled. W.P (C) No.13259/2019 Pg. 3 of 3

6. The case file shall stand consigned to record.