The Rajasthan High Court has held that an FIR filed against a delinquent employee, and departmental proceedings are two different processes, that can run concurrently, and there is no legal bar in holding both of these simultaneously.

The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand further opined that generally, a writ petition does not survive against the charge-sheet issued in departmental proceedings, unless it is established that the same was issued by an authority which was not competent to initiate the disciplinary proceedings.

“It is a settled law that charge-sheet cannot be interfered with by the Court lightly or in a routine manner. The delinquent employee instead of seeking quashing of the charge-sheet, at the initial stage must submit his/her reply before the Enquiry Officer /Disciplinary Authority and wait for conclusion of the proceedings.”

For context, a charge sheet was served to the petitioner under Rule 16 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1958 (“Rules”), alleging that the petitioners demanded bribe which amounted to misconduct under Rules 14 and 15 of the Rajasthan Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971.

The petitioner had challenged this charge sheet on the ground that in relation to same set of allegations, an FIR was also registered against him, with the Anti-Corruption Bureau, Jaipur under the Prevention of Corruption (Amendment) Act, 2018.

It was argued that with regard to similar allegations, the department could not be permitted to take two recourses against him, one by lodging a criminal case, and another by serving a departmental charge-sheet.

After hearing the contentions, the Court referred to the Supreme Court case of Stanze Toyotetsu India Private Limited vs. Girish V. and Others, to hold that,

“FIR against the delinquent and departmental proceedings against the same delinquent are two different proceedings, which can be allowed to run concurrently, as in the FIR, the accused can be prosecuted if the charges are found to be proved against him, whereas in the departmental inquiry, the delinquent can be punished in case the charges are found proved against him, as the standard of proof is one of preponderance of probability.”

The Court further held that correctness of the allegations levelled in the charge-sheet could not be examined by it under the inherent writ jurisdiction. It opined that normally a charge-sheet could not be quashed prior to the conclusion of the enquiry on the ground that the charges were erroneous, since such finding was the function of the disciplinary authority.

In this background, the Court disposed of the petition while granting liberty to the petitioner to raise all available defences before the enquiry office.