VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

DECISION - 413
803
comments by the Governor on the merits of the case should also
receive consideration of the High Court before it forms the final opinion
and forwards its recommendation to the Governor for decision of the
appeal in accordance with that opinion. This is the scheme and
requirement of Article 235.
(413)
Departmental action and prosecution
No bar to proceed simultaneously with departmental
inquiry and criminal trial. Supreme Court laid down
guidelines.
Depot Manager, APSRTC vs. Mohd. Yousuf Miya,
1996(6) SLR SC 629:AIR 1997 SC 2232
Appellant, Driver, Andhra Pradesh State Road Transport
Corporation was proceeded against on a charge of lack of anticipation
in causing an accident in which a cyclist died on 15-9-95.
Simultaneously, prosecution was launched. High Court stayed the
departmental proceedings.
Supreme Court considered the question whether it would be
right to stay the criminal proceedings pending departmental inquiry
and held that the purpose of departmental inquiry and of prosecution
are two different and distinct aspects. The criminal prosecution is
launched for an offence in violation of a duty the offender owes to the
society or for breach of which law has provided that the offender
shall make satisfaction to the public. So crime is an act of commission
in violation of law or of omission of public duty. The departmental
inquiry is to maintain discipline in the service and efficiency of public
service. It would, therefore, be expedient that the disciplinary
proceedings are conducted and completed as expeditiously as
possible. It is not, therefore, desirable to lay down any guidelines as
inflexible rules in which the departmental proceedings may or may
not be stayed pending trial in criminal case against the delinquent
officer. Each case requires to be considered in the backdrop of its