Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Thursday directed the PWD Officials to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) challenging the show cause notices issued to them by the Directorate of Vigilance in connection with alleged "gross violations" of rules in the renovation of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's official residence.

While disposing of an appeal by the Delhi Government challenging an order dated September 15, a division bench comprising Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula said, “…the petition itself is not maintainable and the writ petition before the learned Single Judge stands disposed of with liberty to respondents No.1 to 6 to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing an Original Application as provided under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act”.

Notably, on September 15, the single-judge bench of Justice Chandra Dhari Singh had granted “interim protection” to the six PWD Officials. The judge had ordered that no coercive steps be taken by any authority against them.

Before the single-judge bench, Senior Advocates Salman Khurshid and Atul Nanda had submitted that the petitioners before the court were aggrieved of the show cause notice dated 19th June 2023. “The principal contention against the said Show Cause Notice is that the said Notice has been issued by an authority that is neither authorized nor competent to initiate disciplinary action against the petitioners”, it was submitted.

The senior counsel had also submitted that the petitioners were officers of the Public Works Department, whereas, the show cause notice had been issued by respondent no. 2, i.e. the Special Secretary (Vigilance), Directorate of Vigilance and as such the petitioners were not amenable to the jurisdiction of the Vigilance Department with respect to any disciplinary proceedings.

It was further contended that the Special Secretary (Vigilance), Directorate of Vigilance lacked jurisdiction and authority to issue the Show Cause Notice and hence, the Notice itself was liable to be quashed.

The petitioners in their plea had stated that during the bungalow construction, they were posted in PWD and some have now been transferred to CPWD again.

They also submitted that they had filed an interim reply to the notice on August 7 challenging the concerned officer’s jurisdiction that as per “Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1965, the power to initiate any disciplinary action against the petitioners vested with either the President of India or an appointee of the President or the Central Vigilance Commission.

On the contrary, Senior Advocate Rahul Mehra appearing for two respondents had vehemently opposed the plea and prayed for some time to file counter affidavit. 

On August 17, the court had issued notice in the plea and sought the response of the Delhi government and others.

Case Title: Government of NCT of Delhi and Ors. v. Ashok Kumar Rajdev and Ors.