UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. versus K. K. DHAWAN

Citation: [1993] 1 S.C.R. 296 · Decided: 27-01-1993 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: L.M. SHARMA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 5 judgment(s) · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

• 
A 
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. 
v. 
K. K. DHAWAN 
JANUARY 27, 1993 
B 
[L.M. SHARMA, CJ., S. MOHAN AND S.P. BHARUCHA, JJ.] 
Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 
1965--Rule 14---Disciplinary proceedings against Income Tax Officer for 
y 
violatio11 of Rule J(l)(i)(ii),(iii) of the Central Civil Services {Conduct) 
c 
Rules, 19(;4. while conducting assessments in irregular manner, in undue 
haste, conferring u11due favour upon the assessees-Legality of 
The respondent while working as Income Tax Officer completed 
certain as.sessments during the year 1982-83. 
D 
A charge memorandum, was served on him, proposing to hold an 
E 
F 
inquiry against him under Rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classifica-
tion, Central Appeal) Rules, 1965. 
A statement of article of charge was framed against the respondent. 
The substance of the charge was th"e completion of nine assessments in an 
irregular manner, hastily with a view to confer undue favour upon the 
assessees, and by such act, he failed to maintain absolute integrity and 
devotion to duty and exhibited a conduct unbecoming of government 
sen-ant. 
The details relating to misconduct or misbehaviour of the respon-
dent were furnished and he was charged for violating the provisions of 
Rules 3(l)(i), 3(1)(ii) and 3(l)(iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) 
Rules, 1964. In support of the allegations, he was also supplied with the 
necessary documents. 
G 
Against the memorandum, the ·respondent preferred an application 
before the Central Administrative Tribunal, praying for a stay of the 
disciplinary proceedings and to consider his case for promotion on merits 
without resort to the sealed cover procedure. 
On 8.2.1991, the Tribunal directed the appellant-Union of India to 
H 
open the sealed cover and to implement the recommendations of the 
296 
• 
U.0.1. v. K.K DHAWAN 
297 
Departmental Promotion Committee to promote the respondent to the 
A 
post of Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, if he was found ru for 
promotion within two weeks from the date of order. 
Later on 223.1991, the Trilmnal allowed the respondent's applica-
tion, holding that the action taken by the respondent-officer was quasi-
judicial and should not have formed the basis of disciplinary action. The 
Tribunal also made its earlier order dated 8.2.1991 absolute. 
B 
The Union of India preferred the present appeals by special leave 
against the orders of the Tribunal, contending that in a case where 
disciplinary proceedings were pending against the respondent, the proce-
C 
dure of opening the sealed cover should not have been resorted to. Other-
wise, it would amount to putting a premium on misconduct ; that the 
Tribunal failed to appreciate the ratio of the order in C.A. Nos. 4986-87/90; 
that as the respondent was charged for violation of Rules 3(l)(i), 3(l)(ii) 
and 3(l)(iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1964; immunity 
from the disciplinary action could not be claimed. 
D 
The respondent contended that the opening of the sealed cover was 
correctly ordered because on the date when the Departmental Promotion 
Committee met in March 1989, no charge-sheet was served on the respon-
dent; that as the respondent was exercising quasi-judicial functions, or-
ders made by him if were wrong, the remedy by way of an appeal or 
E 
revision could be resorted to; that if in every case of wrong order, discipli-
nary action was resorted to, it would jeopardize the exercise of judicial 
functions; and the immunity attached to the officer while exercising quasi-
judicial powers would be lost. 
On the question, whether an authority enjoys immunity from dis-
F 
ciplinary proceedings with respect to matters decided by him in exercise 
of quasi-judicial functions; allowing the appeals, this Court, 
HELO : 1.01. The disciplinary action can be taken in the following 
cases : 
(i) Where the Officer had acted in a manner as would reflect on his 
G 
reputation for integrity or good faith or devotion to duty ; 
(ii) if there is prima facie material to show recklessness or miscon-
duct in the discharge of his duty; 
(iii) if he has acted in a manner which is unbecoming of a govern-
H 
298 
SUPREME CQURT REPORTS 
[1993] 1 S.C.R. 
A 
ment servant; [311E-F] 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
G 
(iv) if be bad acted negligently or that be omitted the prescribed 
conditions which are essential for the exercise of the statutory powers; 
(v) if be bad acted in order to unduly favour a party; 

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