Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Dr Sachin Talwar vs Health And Family Welfare on 15 March, 2024
1
O.A. No. 684/2024
Item No. 46 (C-2)
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
PRINCIPAL BENCH, NEW DELHI
O.A. No. 684/2024
This the 15th Day of March, 2024
Hon'ble Mr. Anand Mathur, Member (A)
Hon'ble Mr. Manish Garg, Member (J)
Dr. Sachin Talwar, Aged - 54 Years,
S/o Sh. Vasudev Talwar,
Working as Professor of CTVS in AIIMS, New
Delhi
Residence of E-75, Ansari Nagar (East),
AIIMS, New Delhi - 29
....Applicant
(By Advocates : Mr. Yogesh Sharma)
VERSUS
1. Union of India through
The Secretary,
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare,
Govt. of India, Nirman Bhawan,
New Delhi - 01
2. All India Institute of Medical Science (AIIMS), New
Delhi,
Through its Director,
Ansari Nagar, New Delhi - 110029
.... Respondents
(By Advocate : Mr. V S R Krishna
Ms. Nidhi Rai for Mr. Gyanendra Singh)
2
O.A. No. 684/2024
Item No. 46 (C-2)
ORDER (ORAL)
Hon'ble Mr. Anand Mathur, Member (A) With the consent of learned counsel for both the parties, the matter is taken up for final hearing.
2. The present Original Application (OA) has been filed seeking the following relief :-
"(i) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order quashing the impugned order dated 1.12.2023 (Annex.A/1) declaring to the effect the same is illegal and without jurisdiction and consequently, pass an order directing the respondents (competent disciplinary authority) to consider the request of the applicant for change of Inquiry officer.
(ii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order of set-asiding the ex-
parte enquiry proceedings conducted by the IO after 26.7.2023 and consequently, pass an order directing the respondents to conduct fresh inquiry from the initial stage.
(iii) That the Hon'ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to pass an order of quashing the impugned charge memorandum dated 18.1.2023 declaring to the effect that the same has been issued by the incompetent authority.
(iv) Any other relief which the Hon'ble Tribunal deem fit and proper may also be granted to the applicant along with the costs of litigation." 3 O.A. No. 684/2024 Item No. 46 (C-2)
3. During the course of arguments, learned counsel for the applicant draws our attention to the impugned order dated 01.12.2023 as per which the request/ representation dated 26.07.2023 of the applicant for change of Inquiry Officer (IO) has been rejected by Director, AIIMS. He further draws attention to the Memorandum dated 08.01.2023 placed at Annexure A/2, which has been signed by Director, AIIMS, whereas it has been clearly stated in the Charge Memorandum that it has been issued "BY ORDER & ON BEHALF OF PRESIDENT, AIIMS". He, therefore, claims that the aforesaid representation for change of Inquiry Officer has been rejected by Director, AIIMS, who is not the competent authority to do so. He further states that the Inquiry Officer has conducted the inquiry ex-parte, as the applicant has not participated in the same. Hence, the competent authority may be directed to decide the representation of the applicant for change of Inquiry officer and thereafter proceedings of inquiry may be conducted afresh with effect from 26.07.2023.
4. Mr. V S R Krishna, learned counsel for the respondents disputes the claim of the applicant and states that the impugned order dated 01.12.2023 has been 4 O.A. No. 684/2024 Item No. 46 (C-2) signed by the Director, AIIMS, who is the competent authority to do so and he only had issued the Charge Memorandum in the present case.
5. On hearing learned counsel for the respective parties, we find that there is substance in the arguments put forth by learned counsel for the applicant inasmuch as the impugned order dated 01.12.2023 has been signed by the Director, AIIMS but there is no mention of the fact that the order is on behalf of the President, AIIMS or not. On the contrary, the Charge Memorandum clearly states that it is By order and on behalf of the President, AIIMS.
6. In view of the above, we hereby direct the respondents to place the representation of the applicant for change of Inquiry Officer before the competent authority, who may consider the same and arrive at a decision. Whatever be the decision, inquiry proceedings shall be done afresh with effect from 26.07.2023, strictly as per rules.
7. We, accordingly, dispose of the present O.A. by giving the aforementioned directions to the respondents. It is also made clear that as far as Relief 8 (iii) of the O.A. is 5 O.A. No. 684/2024 Item No. 46 (C-2) concerned, the applicant shall be at liberty to agitate the issue, if so required, in a separate proceeding.
8. No order as to costs.
(Manish Garg) (Anand Mathur)
Member (J) Member (A)
/sm/