Disposed

Mukesh Kumar Sharma v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Delhi HC10 Feb 2025W.P.(C)/9661/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A Reader/Associate Professor challenged departmental memoranda of charges under Article 226. With respondents' consent, the writ petition was disposed of: the inquiry report is to go to the present Disciplinary Authority, which will act in accordance with law, with liberty to the petitioner to raise all grounds including bias and acquittal in criminal proceedings.

What the court decided

AI extract

Mukesh Kumar Sharma Vs Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors. — Service and Employment | Delhi HC (2025)

¶1

$~21

¶2

* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 9661/2019, CM APPL. 39901/2019 & 11465/2021 MUKESH KUMAR SHARMA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, Mr. Parth Sarathi, Mr. Gyanendra Vikram Singh and Mr.Prashant Sharma, Advocates.

¶4

versus GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ORS .....Respondents Through: Ms. Avnish Ahlawat, SC for GNCTD with Mr. Nitesh Kumar Singh, Ms. Laavanya Kaushik, Ms.Aliza Alam and Mr. Mohnish Sehrawat, Advocates. Ms. Mehak Nakra, ASC GNCTD with Ms. Bhavya Nakra, Mr. Aditya Goyal and Ms. Gunjan Suyal, Advocates.

¶5

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN O R D E R

¶6

% 10.02.2025

¶7

The petitioner, who is working as a Reader/Associate Professor in respondent No.2 – Institution, has filed this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, against Memorandum of Charges dated 28.08.2019 and 03.01.2020, issued against him.

¶8

By an order dated 04.09.2019, it was directed that departmental inquiry may continue, but the final report shall not be given by the Inquiry Officer. As far as the second chargesheet is concerned, a similar order was passed on 22.03.2021.

¶9

In the course of hearing, Mr. Sanjay Kumar Visen, learned counsel for the petitioner, submits that as this petition was preferred at the stage

¶10

Page 1 of 2

¶11

W.P.(C) 9661/2019

¶12

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 17/02/2025 at 17:36:51

¶13

of chargesheet, the petitioner will reserve his right to take all available arguments before the Disciplinary Authority and/or the Appellate Authority, in the event the disciplinary order is against him.

¶14

Mr. Visen submits that at the stage of filing of the writ petition, the petitioner had taken grounds of bias and mala-fides against respondent No.3, who was then the Director-Principal (In-charge) of the Institute, but during the pendency of the petition, a new Director-Principal (In-charge) has been appointed. He submits that the inquiry report prepared by the Inquiry Officer may be placed before the present Disciplinary Authority for further action in accordance with law.

¶15

It is also contended that criminal proceedings, which were instituted by the respondents on the same cause of action, have culminated in orders in favour of the petitioner. The protest petition, filed by the complainant, was also rejected. The petitioner may bring these factors to the notice of the Disciplinary Authority, and the Disciplinary Authority may take an appropriate decision in accordance with law.

¶16

Learned counsel for the respondents have no objection to disposal of the writ petition in these terms.

¶17

Having regard to the above, the writ petition stands disposed of, with liberty in the aforesaid terms. It is made clear that the inquiry report will be submitted to the present Disciplinary Authority, who will take action thereafter in accordance with law.

¶18

PRATEEK JALAN, J

¶19

FEBRUARY 10, 2025 SS/kb/

¶20

Page 2 of 2

¶21

W.P.(C) 9661/2019

¶22

Mukesh Kumar Sharma v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Mukesh Kumar Sharma v. Govt of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

M/S Indian Steel Corporation Vs Commissioner of Central Excise, Delhi-I

The Motor & General Finance Ltd. Vs New Delhi Municipal Council

Manjit Walia through Spa Sachin Walia Vs Delhi Development Authority

Sonia Vs Union of India & Anr.

DDA Vs Madhu Bala Dham

Mount Abu Education Society Regd & Anr. Vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Anr.

National Association of Street Vendors of India & Ors. Vs Municipal Corporation of Delhi & Ors.

Retrovis Fashion Pvt. Ltd. Vs Additional Director, Dggi & Ors.

Sh. Ansh Aggarwal & Anr. Vs Govt. of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Shakti Prakash Mishra Vs Ashutosh Sharma & Anr.

Dr. Santosh Kaushik Vs Lt. Governor of Delhi

Ravi Prakash Yadav Vs Union of India & Anr.

Dr. Muzaffar Hassan Vs Jamia Millia Islamia

Md. Hikmatyar Vs Canara Bank through Managing Director and CEO & Anr.