9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (9) TMI 847 - HC - Central ExciseViolation of standing order - petitioner who is serving as an Inspector Customs and Central Excise has filed the instant writ petition seeking the quashing of a departmental charge sheet dated 20.05.2011 issued by an officer of the rank of the Commissioner. - Held that - petitioner has even responded to the charge sheet in terms of having filed a detailed reply. As on date even Inquiry Officer stands appointed. Against such factual back drop it would not be open for the petitioner to file the present writ petition which can be construed only as an attempt to scuttle the departmental proceedings at the very outset. It is not the case set up on behalf of the petitioner that the charge sheet has been issued by an authority lacking jurisdiction to issue the same. The veracity of the articles of charge raised against the petitioner can only be gone into by the Inquiry Officer upon undertaking an exercise of evaluation and appreciation of documents/evidence brought on record - Decided against petitioner.
Issues:
Challenge to departmental charge sheet and standing order validity. Analysis: The petitioner, an Inspector Customs and Central Excise, sought to quash a departmental charge sheet dated 20.05.2011 and a standing order dated 06.06.2000 issued by the Commissioner of Customs. The counsel for the petitioner argued that the articles of charge were not justified as there was no violation of departmental instructions and that the standing order lacked competence. However, the court found no merit in the petition. The petitioner was charged under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, with specific articles of charge and imputations of misconduct. The petitioner had responded to the charge sheet and an Inquiry Officer had been appointed. The court noted that the petitioner's attempt to halt the departmental proceedings at the outset was unfounded, as the validity of the charges would be determined by the Inquiry Officer based on evidence. The court held that there was no jurisdictional issue with the charge sheet and that the veracity of the charges would be assessed during the inquiry. Consequently, the writ petition was dismissed as not maintainable at that stage.
|
