AJITSINH MAHIPATSINH JHALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these petitions were heard together since a common question of law is involved, inasmuch as, whether charge sheets issued to the petitioner are bad on the ground of they being delayed and also the incidental question as to whether the inquiry proceedings could be kept pending for an unreasonably long period of time and thirdly whether, once an inquiry report exonerates the petitioner, is it open for the respondent authorities that too after a substantial delay, without issuing a Disagreement Notice, amend the charge and hold a fresh inquiry.

(2.) Facts of Special Civil Application No. 14928 are as under:

(3.) Mr.Tanna, learned Senior Advocate, appearing for the petitioner would submit that there was no reason why after having exonerated the petitioner of the charges by an Inquiry Officer's Report dtd. 21/3/2011 could the Disciplinary Authority, after seven years undertake the exercise of holding a fresh inquiry and also adding two charges. He would submit that this procedure is without authority of law. He would also submit that even otherwise on the aspect of delay, the charge sheet of 2010 was for incident of the year 2002 and 2004. The petitioner had retired in October 2020 and the prolonging of inquiry proceedings till the year 2021 for the charge of 2002 and 2004 was even otherwise misconceived and in view of the established position of law as set out by the judgements of the Supreme Court the exercise of delayed inquiry and the charge sheet beyond a reasonable period deserves to be quashed and set aside. He relied on C/SCA/14928/2021 CAV JUDGMENT dtd.: 09/09/2022 several decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.