http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,PROHIBITION & EXCISE DEPARTMENT

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: L. SRINIVASAN

DATE OF JUDGMENT:       15/02/1996

BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. BENCH: RAMASWAMY, K. G.B. PATTANAIK (J)

CITATION:  1996 SCC  (3) 157        JT 1996 (3)   202  1996 SCALE  (2)411

ACT:

HEADNOTE:

JUDGMENT:                          O R D E R      Leave granted.      We have heard the counsel an both sides.      Order dated  November 12,  1993 in  O.A. No.1702/93 and 2206/93 of the Tamil Nadu Administrative Tribunal, Madras is in question  before us.  The  respondent  while  working  as Assistant Section  Officer,  Home,  Prohibition  and  Excise Department had  been placed  under suspension.  Departmental inquiry is in process. We are informed that charge sheet was laid for  prosecution for  the offences  of embezzlement and fabrication of  false records etc. and that the offences and the trial of the case is pending. The Tribunal had set aside the departmental  enquiry and  quashed  the  charge  on  the ground of  delay in  initiation of disciplinary proceedings. In the  nature of  the charges,  it would  take long time to detect embezzlement  and fabrication  of false records which should be  done in  secrecy. It  is not necessary to go into the merits  and record  any finding  on the  charge levelled against the  charged officer  since any  finding recorded by this Court  would gravely  prejudice the case of the parties at the  enquiry and  also at the trial. Therefore, we desist from expressing any opinion on merit or recording any of the contentions raised by the counsel on either side. Suffice it to state  that the  Administrative  Tribunal  has  committed grossest error  in its  exercise of the judicial review. The member of  the Administrative  Tribunal appear  to  have  no knowledge of  the  jurisprudence  of  the  service  law  and exercised power  as if  he is an appellate forum de hors the limitation of  judicial review.  This is  one such  instance where a  member had exceeded his power of judicial review in quashing the  suspension  order  and  charges  even  at  the threshold. We  are  coming  across  frequently  such  orders putting heavy pressure on this Court to examine each case in detail. It is high time that it is remedied.      The appeal are accordingly allowed and the order of the

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

Tribunal is  set aside.  The controversy  is  at  large  the disciplinary authority  would be  free to  proceed with  the enquiry and  trial also be proceeded in accordance with law. No costs.