VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

564 DECISION - 264
(264)
(A) Fresh inquiry / De novo inquiry
(B) Charge — withdrawn and re-issued
(i) Issue of fresh charge sheet on charges withdrawn
earlier but not adjudicated, proper.
(ii) Subsequent charge sheets would not be tenable
only if the initial charges were adjudicated upon.
Harbajan Singh Sethi vs. Union of India,
1987(2) SLR CAT CHD 545
A Divisional Accountant in the Mechanical Division, P.W.D.,
Sirsa (Ambala) was charge-sheeted on 16-6-82 on certain allegations.
Some of the charges were withdrawn by an order dated 18-10-82 on
the ground that they involved falsification of records and cheating
and it was necessary to consider the desirability of referring the case to
the Police/C.B.I. for investigation. In respect of the charges not withdrawn,
the inquiry was conducted and he was dismissed from service by order
dated 6-11-82. On appeal, the Appellate Authority set aside the order of
dismissal and imposed the penalty of reduction in pay.
The applicant was given a fresh charge-sheet on 22-6-84
incorporating one charge which was withdrawn earlier, and on 11-12-85
another charge-sheet incorporating yet another charge which was
withdrawn earlier, was issued. The applicant challenged the issue of
the fresh charge-sheets before the Central Administrative Tribunal,
Chandigarh Bench on the ground of violation of Art. 20(2) of Constitution.
The Tribunal rejected the contention pointing out that the
charges initially levelled against him were not dropped but were only
withdrawn. The meaning of the word ‘drop’ is ‘to come to an end,
cease, lapse or disappear’, whereas the word ‘withdrawal’ means
‘take back, to recall’ etc. It thus meant that the case against the
applicant was not closed but was kept alive. The Tribunal also pointed
out that subsequent charge-sheets would not be tenable only if the