GUWAHATI, India, Feb. 23 -- Gauhati High Court issued the following order on Jan. 22:

1. Heard Mr. K N Choudhury, learned Senior counsel assisted by Mr. D J Das, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. T C Chutia, learned Additional Senior Government Advocate, Assam for the State respondents.

2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 06.02.2025 whereby the respondent State has appointed a new enquiry officer in connection with the show cause notice dated 09.02.2018 issued against the petitioner, thereby seeking to continue the departmental proceedings, notwithstanding that the petitioner has already been acquitted in the corresponding criminal case arising from the same incident and despite earlier orders passed by this Court directing a time bound conclusion of the departmental proceedings.

3. It is not in dispute that earlier the petitioner had approached this Court in WP(C) No. 1053/2024 assailing the pendency of the departmental proceeding despite the conclusion of the criminal trial. Upon consideration of the materials, including comparison of the charge-sheet in the departmental proceeding and the criminal case and the list of witnesses, this Court, by judgment and order dated 29.10.2024 had directed the State respondents to conclude the departmental proceeding within a time frame of one month.

Relevant paragraphs of the aforesaid judgment reads as under -

"33. As noted above, in the present case, the departmental proceeding and the criminal case are based on identical and similar set of facts and the charge in the departmental case and the charge before the Criminal Court against the petitioner are also one and the same. The listed witnesses in the departmental case were examined in the criminal case and the Criminal Court upon examination of such witnesses has concluded that the prosecution has failed to establish that the petitioner/accused had demanded illegal gratification from the informant. That being so, in the considered opinion of this Court, further continuation of the departmental proceeding against the petitioner is wholly unfair and unjustified.

34. Accordingly, this Court deems appropriate to dispose of the writ petition, in the interest of justice, by directing the respondent authorities to conclude the departmental proceeding which is pending against the petitioner in accordance with law by keeping in mind the observations made hereinabove within a period of 1 (one) month from the date of the receipt of the certified copy of the Court's order."

4. It is also brought to the notice of this Court that during the currency of the time frame fixed for conclusion of the departmental proceeding, the State respondents had filed an interlocutory application, being I.A.(Civil) No. 3844/2024, seeking extension of the time, which was rejected by this Court by order dated 09.01.2025.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://hcservices.ecourts.gov.in/ecourtindiaHC/cases/display_pdf.php?filename=A9S7c5LDIsB6RXaCf816x0seuhrNp6EQJQvRXiF66KNiJTKuGrIzI7qvFsut%2Bnnk&caseno=WP(C)/1076/2025&cCode=1&cino=GAHC010040212025&state_code=6&appFlag=)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.