A two-judge bench dismissed this writ appeal arising from a writ petition challenging a charge sheet and an order directing a de novo disciplinary enquiry. The court held that the lower court correctly dismissed the petition as no prejudice was caused due to the incomplete first enquiry.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
WA No. 180 of 2021
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WA No. 180 of 2021
(Arising out of the order dated 15.6.2021 passed in WP(S) No.2634/2021)
Versus
---- Respondent
For Appellant Mr. Tanmay Thomas, Advocate For Respondent Mr. Arijit Tiwari, Panel Lawyer
Proceedings through Video Conferencing
DB.: Hon'ble Mr. Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag. C.J &
Hon'ble Mrs. Rajani Dubey, J.
Order on Board by Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag. C.J.
8/7/2021
2
WA No. 180 of 2021
Rajnandgaon. It was contended before the writ Court as well as in this appeal that in a previously constituted enquiry passed on the same set of facts, enquiry was at the fag end but the same was stayed by the High Court in WP(S) No.5967/2019, however, consequently, the Disciplinary Authority dropped the proceedings and directed for de novo enquiry, which was not permissible in law.
Sd/- Sd/-
( Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Rajani Dubey) Acting Chief Justice Judge
Shyna
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned Single Judge erred in dismissing the writ petition challenging the charge sheet and the order dropping proceedings for a de novo enquiry.
Whether a charge sheet can be quashed at the threshold when there has been no final order in disciplinary proceedings.
Dhaneshwar Prasad Napit
State Of Chhattisgarh
Prashant Kumar Mishra
Rajani Dubey
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
