Tribunal Observes That a De Novo Inquiry by a Different Officer on the Same Charges Is Not Permissible; Next Hearing on November 26
Asif Iqbal Naik
Jammu, October 23: The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Jammu Bench, has stayed the operation of a government order directing a fresh departmental inquiry against a Junior Engineer in Jammu and Kashmir, observing that a de novo inquiry by a different inquiry officer on the same charges is not permissible under law.
The interim relief was granted in Original Application No. 1447/2026, titled Arshad Amin versus Public Works Department, R&B, through an order dated October 14, 2026. The case was heard by Member (Administrative) Pragya Sahay Saksena and Member (Judicial) Sanjeev Gupta.
The tribunal stayed the operation of Government Order No. 343-PW (R&B) of 2026, dated September 30, 2026, subject to objections from the respondents, until the next hearing scheduled for November 26, 2026.
According to the applicant’s counsel, Faheem Shokat Butt, the departmental proceedings began following a government order issued by the General Administration Department on August 16, 2024. The applicant was subsequently served with a memorandum containing draft charges and a statement of imputations on December 10, 2024.
The first inquiry officer, in a report dated March 20, 2025, had reportedly recommended the penalty of censure along with the withholding of two increments. Following a communication from the Rural Development and Panchayati Raj Department dated May 19, 2025, another inquiry was conducted.
The second inquiry officer, in a report submitted on June 9, 2026, concluded that the allegations against the applicant could not be substantiated.
Challenging the subsequent departmental action, the applicant argued that initiating another inquiry through a different officer on the same charges violated Rule 33 of the Jammu and Kashmir Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1956.
The applicant’s counsel also relied on a Supreme Court judgment in Chandni Prateek Sharma versus High Court of Gujarat, dated April 21, 2026, and a Karnataka High Court judgment in Ravi D Bagalkot versus State of Karnataka, dated October 14, 2025.
Opposing the application, Additional Advocate Generals Rajesh Thapa and Sudesh Magotra submitted that the applicant was involved in FIR No. 06 of 2021, registered under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Station Anti-Corruption Bureau, Central Jammu, and was facing trial before a court of law.
After hearing both sides, the tribunal referred to the legal principle against conducting a de novo inquiry through a different inquiry officer on the same charges, citing the judgments relied upon during the proceedings.
The tribunal issued notices to the respondents and directed them to file their reply to the original application by or before the next hearing, with an advance copy to the applicant’s counsel.
The interim order suspends the operation of the challenged government order until the next date of hearing. The matter remains pending adjudication before the tribunal.
