Do not keep disciplinary proceedings in abeyance, says HC

By keeping the disciplinary proceedings in abeyance merely because a criminal case is pending, and permitting delinquent officers to continue in service and receive benefits, the very purpose of the conduct rules would be defeated, the Madurai Bench of the Madras High Court has said.

Justice B. Pugalendhi said the court was unable to understand as to how the disciplinary authority can take a call on whether disciplinary proceedings can be kept in abeyance, when the Supreme Court has consistently made it clear there was no legal bar for simultaneous disciplinary proceedings during the pendency of criminal cases.

The court said when the entry of a person with criminal antecedents into government service was considered to have a bearing on the purity of administration, the involvement of a serving government employee in a criminal case, particularly a corruption case arising out of the discharge of official duties, cannot be viewed with any less seriousness. In fact, the continued presence of such a person in service, without timely departmental action, has a direct bearing on the purity, functioning and reputation of the administration.

“It appears that the directions for simultaneous proceedings, which have been issued from 1973 onwards by way of government orders, circulars and instructions, are insufficient. The disciplinary authorities were not complying with the same,” the court said.

The court said it is of the opinion that the instructions and directions have to be incorporated under the existing rules, specifically the Tamil Nadu Civil Service (Discipline and Appeal) Rules and also the relevant conduct rules, so that the instructions are followed.

This, the judge said, would provide statutory backing for conducting simultaneous disciplinary proceedings and it expects the government to take a call on the issue and bring necessary amendments to the service rules.

The court was hearing the batch of petitions filed by government employees against whom criminal cases were filed under the Prevention of Corruption Act based on traps laid by Directorate of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption. The court disposed of the petitions with a direction to authorities to initiate disciplinary proceedings against the petitioners and conclude the same in six months.