V.K. Shukla, J. - (1.) PETITIONER has approached this Court for following relief: (i) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the departmental disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner under Rule 14(1) of Uttar Pradesh Police Officer of Subordinate Ranks (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991, in pursuance of the order/charge sheet dated April, 2011, issued by the Respondent No. 4. (ii) Issue a writ order or direction in the nature of Mandamus directing the Respondents, to stay the further departmental disciplinary proceedings initiated against the Petitioner in pursuance of the order/charge sheet dated April, 2011. (iii) Issue any other writ order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case. (iv) To award cost of this petition.
(2.) BRIEF background of the case is that Petitioner has been performing and discharging his duties as constable. First information report has been lodged against the Petitioner being Case Crime No. 383 of 2009, under Sections 384 and 504 I.P.C. Act, at Police Station Hapur Dehat, District Ghaziabad. In the said criminal case, charge sheet in question has been filed. On April, 2011 by the Respondent No. 4. departmental charge sheet has been given, at this juncture Petitioner has moved an application on 29.4.2011 mentioning therein that departmental charge sheet has been issued to him on April, 2011 in order to initiate proceeding under Rule 14(1) of U.P. Police Officers of the Subordinate Rank (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1991 and as criminal trial is on going, departmental proceeding be stayed. On no action being taken, at this juncture present writ petition has been filed with the prayer mentioned above. Sri Vijay Gautam, Advocate, learned Counsel for the Petitioner contended with vehemence that in the present case, criminal case and departmental proceeding are based on same set of fact and same evidence, as such continuance of departmental inquiry, is not at all justifiable and consequentially directive be issued for withholding departmental proceeding till criminal trial is not over. For this preposition he has also placed reliance on Regulation 492 and 493 of U.P. Police Regulations as well as judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case Capt. M. Paul Anthony v. Bharat Coal Mines Ltd. : 1999 (3) S.C.C. 679 and : 2004 (7) S.C.C. 27 State Bank of India v. R.B. Sharma and the judgment of this Court in the case of Prafulla Kumar v. ST Mukhawar, Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 36479 of 2005 decided on 1.4.2011.
(3.) LEARNED Standing Counsel on the other hand contended that there is no bar in simultaneous proceeding i.e. criminal proceeding and departmental proceeding can go on simultaneously as area of both departmental proceeding and criminal prosecution are altogether different and as such there is no occasion for staying departmental proceedings such writ petition be dismissed.;