Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Nasimuddin Ansari vs Satish Singh Irsme on 24 November, 2022

Author: Sachin Datta

Bench: Sachin Datta

                          $~79
                          *    IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                          +     CONT.CAS(C) 1285/2022
                                NASIMUDDIN ANSARI                                    ..... Petitioner
                                            Through:            Mr. Tapas Dal, Advocate.

                                                   versus

                                SATISH SINGH IRSME                                   ..... Respondent
                                              Through:          Mr. Bharti Raju, Standing Counsel for
                                                                UOI.
                                CORAM:
                                HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN DATTA
                                                   ORDER

% 24.11.2022

1. The present petition alleges wilful disobedience/non-compliance of the directions contained in the order dated 20.09.2019, passed by this Court in W.P.(C) 11767/2016. The said order reads as under:-

"CM APPL. 41040/2019 (for modification)

1. This is an application by the Petitioner seeking modification of the order dated 25th October 2018 passed by this Court.

2. In the said order this Court had, inter alia, concluded in para 14 that given the fact that the charges against the Petitioner had only been partly proved and to a limited extent, and the Petitioner not having been held responsible for causing any monetary loss to the Government, there was no occasion for the imposition of a penalty different from the one awarded to Mr. V. V. Rao SC (ENM) who was also proceeded against and who was the Petitioner's superior discharging a higher responsibility than the Petitioner.

3. In paragraph 12 of the order dated 25th October, 2018 this Court had recorded that the penalty imposed on Mr. V.V. Rao was that of 'censure'. This was apparently a mistake. Enclosed with the present Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ANU KAPOOR Signing Date:28.11.2022 18:40:00 application is a copy of an order dated 25th October 2002 in the case of Mr. Rao, the operative portion of which reads thus:

"The Disciplinary Authority, therefore has been pleased to drop the proceedings against Shri V.V, Rao, SE(E&M) Retd. However, the displeasure of the Govt. is hereby communicated to him for the minor infringement referred to above."

4. Consequently, the sentence in para 12 of this Court's order dated 25th October which reads "The Court's attention is drawn to the penalty imposed on Mr. V.V Rao SC (ENM) where, under similar circumstances, he was awarded the penalty of "censure", shall stand corrected to read as under:

"The Court's attention is drawn to the order passed in the case of Mr. V.V Rao SC (ENM) where, under similar circumstances, he was communicated the displeasure of the government and the proceedings against him were dropped."

5. In that view of the matter, the corresponding direction in para 16 of this Court's order dated 25th October 2018 is corrected to read as follows:

"Consequently, the Court sets aside the impugned order dated 11th March 2003 passed by the Border Roads Development Board insofar as the penalty is concerned and directs that the Petitioner will be communicated the displeasure of the Government and the proceedings against him will be dropped."

6. As a result, the order dated 11th February, 2019 passed by the Disciplinary Authority (DA)/Joint Secretary (JS) in the Ministry of Defence (MoD) consequent upon the order dated 25th October 2018 is hereby set aside. A direction is issued to the DA/JS, MoD to now pass a fresh order in terms of the above corrected order of this Court not later than 4 weeks from today and grant all consequential reliefs to the Petitioner.

7. The application is disposed of in the above terms."

2. An order, i.e., F.No. BRDB/02(123)/99/GE-II/D (Vig-MES & BRO) dated 12.12.2019, is stated to have been passed pursuant to the aforesaid order dated 20.09.2019, wherein it has been stated as under:-

"8. AND WHEREAS, pursuant to the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi's ibid order dated· 20.09.2019 and ·in modification of this Ministry's earlier orders dated 11.03.2003 and dated 11.02.2019 as ·mentioned in para 2 and 5 above respectively, Disciplinary Authority has now decided to communicate "Displeasure of the Government" to Shri M.N. Ansari, AEE {E&M), to be effective from 11.03.2003 i.e. the date on which a minor penalty of withholding of one increment, for a period of two years, was imposed on him, vide aforementioned order No. BRDB/02(123)/99/GE-II dated 11.03.2003. And orders accordingly."

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the aforesaid order, the necessary consequential benefits to which petitioner was entitled, have not been given to the petitioner. He further submits that the petitioner is to superannuate on 28.02.2023, and he has been running from pillar to post for his entitlements, but to no avail.

4. Issue notice.

5. Learned standing counsel, as aforesaid, enters appearance and accepts notice on behalf of the respondent.

6. Let a reply be filed by the respondent within a period of two weeks from today.

7. List on 9th December, 2022.

SACHIN DATTA, J NOVEMBER 24, 2022/AK Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ANU KAPOOR Signing Date:28.11.2022 18:40:00