Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court

Sub-Inspector Tariq Ali Khan vs Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi And Ors on 8 January, 2013

Author: Pradeep Nandrajog

Bench: Pradeep Nandrajog, Veena Birbal

*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

%                                         Date of Decision: January 08, 2013


+                              W.P.(C) 94/2013

       SUB-INSPECTOR TARIQ ALI KHAN             ..... Petitioner
                    Represented by: Mr.Sourabh Ahuja, Adv.

                      versus

       GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ORS               ..... Respondents
                     Represented by: Mr.Sachin Chopra with
                                     Mr.Sarvpreet S.Chawla, Advs.


       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE VEENA BIRBAL


PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J. (Oral)

1. Pertaining to an incident which allegedly took place on September 11, 1998 in which it was alleged that the writ petitioner tampered with the visa on the passport of Era, a young bride who was proceeding for a honeymoon with her beau and extorting US $500, a FIR for offence punishable under Section 384 IPC read with Section 12 of the Passport Act were registered.

2. Now, an act may constitute a civil wrong as also a criminal wrong. If it so does, it is settled law that it would entail a civil action as also a criminal action.

3. Pertaining to the same act and in the context of it being a civil wrong, disciplinary action was initiated against the petitioner and concluded by levying penalty of permanent forfeiture of two years approved service.

4. With respect to the criminal wrong element of the act, the petitioner was convicted and was sentenced to undergo imprisonment till the rising of the court, against which appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and matter currently awaits adjudication in a Criminal Revision Petition.

5. Exercising power under Rule 11(1) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980 which permits dismissal from service upon being convicted by a court for the same act for which in the context of it being a civil wrong action was already taken the competent authority levied the penalty of dismissal from service.

6. The issue which arose before the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 747/2008 is : Whether for the same act, in the context of it being a civil wrong, if penal action is taken, can for the criminality of the same act upon being convicted power as per Rule 11(1) be exercisable or whether upon levying a penalty pertaining to the civil wrong element of the act, the disciplinary power gets exhausted meaning thereby no action can be taken under Rule 11(1) of the Delhi Police (Punishment and Appeal) Rules, 1980.

7. Unfortunately, the impugned order passed by the Tribunal appears to be a mechanist exercise of the application of mind and not a reasoned application of mind and accordingly we dispose of the writ petition setting aside the impugned order dated December 12, 2011. OA No. 747/2008 is restored for adjudication before the Tribunal. The order does not even note the legal issue which was to be decided.

8. The Tribunal will keep into mind the legal issue which arises for consideration and as noted by us in the present decision and thereafter would decide the matter. Since parties are present before us, we direct that OA No. 747/2008 shall be listed before the Registrar of the Central Administrative Tribunal on February 04, 2013 on which date counsel for the parties shall appear.

9. The Registrar would thereafter list the matter before the appropriate Bench for adjudication.

10. No costs.

11. Dasti.

Dismissed as infructuous.

(PRADEEP NANDRAJOG) JUDGE (VEENA BIRBAL) JUDGE JANUARY 08, 2013 kks W.P.(C) No. 94/2013 Page 3 of 3