28-05-2025
HC dismisses plea from ex-CBI judge Parmar in disciplinary proceedings
The Punjab and Haryana high court (HC) has dismissed a petition filed by former CBI special court judge Sudhir Parmar in a disciplinary proceedings case arising out of April 2023 criminal case. The HC bench of chief justice Sheel Nagu and justice HS Grewal ruled that a delinquent judicial officer has no right to submit a reply to the chargesheet beyond the outer limit of 45 days as mandated by the rules.
Now, the court has set a deadline of six months and 25 days as the outer limit for completion of all current and future disciplinary proceedings. It said, failure to adhere to the same would invite punitive action against the inquiry officer or any other erring personnel of the high court, it added.
The petition was from Parmar, a suspended officer, seeking directions to the court's administrative side to allow filing of a reply to the chargesheet slapped on him at a belated stage. Parmar was booked in an FIR, under sections 7, 8, 11 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act and Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in April 2023. At that point of time, he was special CBI judge, Panchkula, and was accused of alleged favouritism towards some real estate developers, being probed by CBI and ED. FIRs pertaining to them were pending before the court presided over by Parmar. However, he failed to submit reply within the given time frame.
He was suspended on April 27, 2023, and issued a chargesheet on July 24, 2023.
The court observed that as per Rule 7 of Haryana Civil Services (Punishment & Appeal) Rules, 2016, upon being issued chargesheet, the delinquent employee has to submit his response within an outer limit of 45 days. However, he failed to do so.
'..the inquiry officer ought to have proceeded ex-parte against the delinquent employee on his failure to file the written statement of defence and proceeded to examine the witnesses and the documents produced by the employer instead of adjourning the proceedings repeatedly on one pretext or the other,' the court observed with a direction to the inquiry officer to conclude the disciplinary proceedings by submitting the inquiry report as early as possible. Thereafter, the high court should also make its recommendations expeditiously, it said further asking the court's administration to ensure that in all ongoing as well as disciplinary inquiries to be initiated in the future, the timeline is adhered to.
