In the significant case, the Gujarat High Court bench of Judges AS Supehia And Gita Gopi has quashed a charge sheet issued against Charu Bhatt, who was the director of accounts and treasury, accused of renewing her passport in 2013 without obtaining a no-objection certificate (NOC) from the state government.

While two other charges related to obtaining a passport and unauthorized foreign travel were dropped, the Court found that renewal without an NOC did not constitute “misconduct” under the conduct rules of Gujarat Civil Services, 1971, as it was merely an administrative “mistake”. .

Brief facts:

Charu Narendrabhai Bhatt (appellant) filed an appeal under Section 15 of the Letters Patent, directed against the order dated 2.05.2024, wherein her writ petition was dismissed by the learned Single Judge. The petition sought to challenge an indictment issued on 24.05.2021, alleging misconduct. Although two charges were later dropped by the State, Charge #2 remained, alleging that the Appellant renewed her passport without obtaining a NOC in 2013. The Appellant argued that this did not constitute misconduct within the meaning of Gujarat Civil Services Rule 3(1). (Conduct) Rules, 1971 and that the delay in issuing the charge-sheet justified its quashing.

Comments:

The Court observed that the delay of 8 years in the issuance of the charge sheet at the end of the service of the appellant was indicative of a in bad faith intentionally, probably due to personal grudges on the part of the officer responsible for issuing the indictment. The court relied on the case of UCO Bank and others v Rajendra Shankar Shuklawhere the Supreme Court quashed and quashed the indictment for inordinate and unexplained delay.

The court noted that Rule 3(1) of the Gujarat Civil Services (Conduct) Rules, 1971, refers to three aspects which the civil servant must maintain, (i) absolute integrity, (ii) dedication to duty, and (iii)) conduct which does not become unbecoming of a public servant. The court ruled that the act of the appellant – who failed to obtain a NOC when renewing his passport – did not constitute a “lack of integrity” or a “lack of dedication to duty ”, nor could it be considered “unbecoming of a Government Official” under paragraph (iii). This omission could at most be considered an “error” rather than egregious conduct.

Further, the court observed that Rule 24 of the Gujarat Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 2002 allows the government to withhold or withdraw pension only when the pensioner is found guilty of “gross misconduct or negligence” during the service. period of service. She noted that Charge No. 2 of the indictment does not in any way meet the expression “gross misconduct or negligence.” Thus, the officer’s intention to issue the indictment by unearthing the outdated documents appeared to jeopardize the appellant’s retirement benefits by continuing departmental proceedings beyond her retirement benefits.

The court observed that the judgment of Union of India and another Vs. Kunisetty Satyanarayana does not completely prevent the High Court from quashing the charge sheet or show cause notice and this can be done in rare and exceptional cases. She found that the appellant had provided for such an exception and that her case fell into the category of “rare and exceptional cases”. Thus, due to an unexplained delay of 8 years and the nature of the alleged misconduct, the indictment was quashed and quashed.

The court awarded Rs. 10,000 as costs to the appellant and granted the State an opportunity to recover the amount from the erring officer.

Case title: Charu Narendrabhai Bhatt v State of Gujarat

File number: LPA 540/2024

Appearance: Mr. Vaibhav A Vyas (2896) for the Appellant; Mr. Sahil B. Trivedi, AGP for the Respondent.

Judgment date: 28.10.2024

Click here to read/download the order