M.V. BIJLANI versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: [2006] 3 S.C.R. 896 · Decided: 05-04-2006 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: S.B. SINHA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A 
M.V. BIJLANI 
v. 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
APRIL 5, 2006 
B 
[S.B. SINHA AND P.P. NAOLEKAR, JJ.] 
Service Law: 
Disciplinary Proceedings-Conducting of on the issues on which no 
C charges framed Propriety of-Employee allegedly failed and/or neglected to 
maintain a register known as ACE-8 Register-Disciplinary proceedings 
initiated against him, five years after he handed over charge, remained 
pending for seven years-The Enquiry Officer proceeded as if in the 
departmental proceedings the employee was charged with misappropriation 
D of property-Employee was removed from service-The appellate authority, 
while dismissing the appeal flied by the employee, went into the question of 
maintenance of muster roll and the diaries maintained on a day-to-day basis 
although that was not the subject matter of the charge--The High Court also 
proceeded on the basis that the non-maintenance of diary amounted to 
E misutilization of copper wire-Held: It is true that the jurisdiction of the 
court in judicial review is limited-Disciplinary proceedings, however, being 
quasi-criminal in nature, there should be some evidences to prove the charge-
A serious charge could not have been enquired into without framing 
appropriate charges--lnitiation of the disciplinary proceedings as also 
F 
continuance thereof after a long time evidently prejudiced the delinquent 
officer-Hence, the orders of the disciplinary authority as also the appellate 
authority cannot be sustained-Dismissal set aside-Judicial Review. 
The appellant, a Junior Engineer, allegedly failed and/or neglected to 
maintain a register known as ACE-8 Register. After he handed over charge 
to his successor disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him, which 
G remained pending for a period of seven years. The appellant was directed to 
be removed from service by the Disciplinary Authority. The appellate authority, 
while dismissing the appeal filed by the appellant, went into the question of 
maintenance of muster roll and the diaries maintained on a day-to-day basis 
although that was not the subject matter of the charge. The Central 
896 
• 
--
-j 
le 
M.V. BIJLAN!v. U.0.1. 
897 
Administrative Tribunal dismissed the original application filed by the A 
appellant. The High Court dismissed the writ petition filed by the appellant 
on the ground that there had been dereliction of duty which penetrated into 
the arena of misutilization. The High Court rejected the contention of the 
appellant that there had been a theft of copper wire, again relying upon the 
report of the Enquiry Officer. Hence the appeal. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
B 
HELD: 1.1. From a perusal of the Enquiry Report, it appears that the 
disciplinary authorities proceeded on a wrong premise. The appellant was 
principally charged for non-maintenance of ACE-8 Register. He was not 
charged for theft or misappropriation of telegraph copper wire or misutilization C 
thereof. If he was to be proceeded against for misutilization or misappropriation 
of the said copper wire, it was necessary for the disciplinary authority to frame 
appropriate charges in that behalf. Charges were said to have been made after 
receipt of a report from CBI (Anti-Corruption Bureau). It was, therefore, 
expected that definite charges of misutilization/misappropriation of copper D 
wire by the appellant would have been framed. The appellant, therefore, should 
have been charged for defalcation or misutilization of the stores he had handled 
if he was to be departmentally proceeded against on that basis. The second 
charge shows that he had merely failed to supervise the working of the line. 
There was no charge that he failed to account for the copper wire over which 
he had physical control. [903-A, B, q 
E 
1.2. The charges which were framed related to only non-maintenance 
of ACE-8 Register and non-supervision of working of the line. In the absence 
of any charge that the appellant had in fact misappropriated copper wire for 
his own benefit out of the disposal thereof, the question as regards purported F 
misconduct by way of mis utilization of copper wire could not have been gone 
into. Furthermore, it has not been shown that ACE-8 Register was required 
to be maintained in an appropriate form or in a particular manner i.e. in bound 
form or in loose sheets. [903-D, E) 
2. The Central Administrative Tribunal as also the High Court failed G 
to take into consideration that the disciplinary proceedings were initiate

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.