The Supreme Court has observed that the power to dismiss a government servant from service without holding a departmental enquiry cannot be exercised on mere presumption that conducting such an enquiry is not reasonably practicable. The Court added that the decision of the authority to dispense with the requirement of holding an enquiry before dismissing a government servant should be supported by some material.
A bench comprising Justices J.K. Maheshwari and Atul S. Chandurkar heard an appeal filed by the Delhi police constable, who was dismissed from service without holding a departmental enquiry on the presumption of the Deputy Commissioner of Police (DCP) that conducting such an enquiry would not be reasonably practicable, as the appellant, facing a criminal trial, might threaten or intimidate witnesses.
Setting aside the High Court's decision, the Court restored the services of the appellant, holding that the High Court erred in upholding his dismissal. The Court observed that the power to dismiss a government servant without holding an enquiry under clause (b) of the second proviso to Article 311(2) of the Constitution can be exercised only when it is not reasonably practicable to conduct such an enquiry, and the decision to dispense with it must be supported by relevant material.
Observing that the DCP's report did not disclose any specific instance of threat or intimidation to justify dispensing with a departmental enquiry, the Court held that the appellant's dismissal without conducting such an enquiry was illegal and unsustainable in law.
“In the case at hand after registration of the FIR when the appellant was in custody the order of dismissal was passed. He was released only thereafter. As such, without indicating any instance of intimidation, traumatising, threatening or persuading the complainant or the witness to turn hostile from inside the jail, the belief or presumption as recorded by the disciplinary authority is not sufficient to bring the present case within the exception to Article 311(2) by applying clause (b) of second proviso thereto.”, the court observed.
A combined reading of the provisions in the law indicates that conducting an enquiry before dismissing a government servant from service is the general rule. However, where the competent authority records reasons to believe that holding such an enquiry is not reasonably practicable, the government servant may be dismissed without conducting an enquiry.
The appellant was serving as a constable in the Special Cell of the Delhi Police when an FIR was registered against him for offences including robbery and conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. He was arrested. While he was still in custody, the Deputy Commissioner of Police dismissed him from service, invoking Article 311(2)(b) and stating that conducting a departmental enquiry was not reasonably practicable because witnesses could be threatened or intimidated.
The constable challenged the dismissal before the Central Administrative Tribunal, but his plea was rejected. His writ petition was also dismissed by the Delhi High Court, leading him to approach the Supreme Court.
Follow us
