Writ Court Can Interfere With Findings In Departmental Inquiry If They Are Based On No Evidence : Himachal Pradesh HC

The Himachal Pradesh High Court observed that while exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the Court can interfere in the findings in departmental inquiry if they are based on no evidence or are perverse.

A Petition was filed by the Petitioner against the orders of the Administrative Tribunal, whereby the Petitioner was suspended from his services as Superintendent Grade-II in Directorate of Horticulture, for complaining against the Government and making statements in the media against the Government policies and decisions.

The Division Bench of Justice Vivek Singh Thakur and Justice Ranjan Sharma observed, “Ex parte Inquiry does not mean that the Inquiry Officer is free to return findings in favour of the Department without any evidence on record.”

Senior Advocate Sanjeev Bhushan represented the Petitioner, while Advocates Balwinder Singh and Ajeet Kumar Saklan represented the Respondents.

Case Brief

The Petitioner who was serving as Superintendent Grade-II in Directorate of Horticulture was ordered by the Administrative Tribunal to be suspended for complaining against the Government and making statements in the media against the Government policies and decisions on various issues, in violation of Rules 3 and 8 of the Central Civil Services (CCS) Conduct Rules. He was further directed not to leave the headquarters without obtaining prior permission of the competent authority.

It was the contention of the Petitioner that documents relied upon by the Inquiry Officer against the Petitioner have not been proved by any witness examined by the Department/Presenting Officer. There was circumstantial evidence of newspaper cuttings against the Petitioner.

While the State submitted that despite giving opportunity to the Petitioner to represent his case, he did not appear before the Inquiry Officer and resultantly inquiry was proceeded ex parte and thus now petitioner is not entitled for any relief as claimed.

Court’s Reasoning

The Bench opined that even if it is considered that Petitioner did not associate, cooperate and join the Inquiry, then also Articles of Charges framed against Petitioner were required to be proved by Department through Presenting Officer, by leading cogent and reliable evidence.

“Though petitioner was proceeded ex parte during the Inquiry proceedings, however, before that he had submitted his representation disputing the veracity and correctness of Article of Charges framed against him. Even after receiving Inquiry Report, he had denied the Article of Charges framed against him, therefore, it is not a case where petitioner did not dispute and deny the charges leveled against him, but it is a case where there is a complete expressed denial of allegations leveled in Article of Charges framed against petitioner”, the Court Said.

Further, the Court observed that it was incumbent upon the Authority, Presenting Officer and Inquiry Officer to place on record sufficient evidence to prove the documents on the basis of which Article of Charges were framed in order to substantiate the allegations contained in Article of Charges.

The Himachal Pradesh High Court held, “In present case, Presenting Officer, concerned Authority and Inquiry Officer have failed to perform their duty and adhere to the basic principle of Natural Justice as well as service jurisprudence. Therefore, in this case interference by exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is warranted.”

The Court quashed the findings in the Inquiry and the order of suspension of the Petitioner.

Accordingly, the Petition was allowed by the Court.

Cause Title: Vinod Kumar V. State of H.P & Ors. (Neutral Citation: 2025:HHC:18555)

Appearance:

Petitioner: Senior Advocate Sanjeev Bhushan and Advocate Rajesh Kumar

Respondent: Advocate Balwinder Singh, Deputy Advocate General, for Respondents No. 1 and 2. Advocate Ajeet Kumar Saklani for Respondents No. 3 and 4.

Click here to read/download Judgment.