William Ekka vs. State Of Chhattisgarh
Facts
The petitioner, William Ekka, a retired Senior Registrar, filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the completion of a pending departmental enquiry. A charge sheet was issued to the petitioner on October 13, 2023, prior to his retirement on October 31, 2023. The departmental enquiry remained incomplete even after his retirement. The petitioner's counsel requested the court to direct the respondents to conclude the enquiry within a specific timeframe. The State counsel assured that the enquiry would be concluded within three months if it was still pending. The Court perused the pleadings and the charge sheet.
Held
The Court held that the departmental enquiry against the petitioner was still pending, and the petitioner had retired on October 31, 2023. Based on the statement made by the learned State counsel, the Court directed the respondents to conclude the departmental enquiry within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the order. The Court did not delve into the merits of the charge sheet or the enquiry proceedings themselves, focusing solely on the procedural aspect of its timely completion. The ratio decidendi is that once a departmental enquiry is pending against an employee who subsequently retires, and the State assures timely completion, the High Court can direct its conclusion within a reasonable period. The writ petition was disposed of with this direction.
Key Issues
1. Whether the Court should direct the respondents to conclude the pending departmental enquiry against the petitioner within a stipulated period? The petitioner argued that the departmental enquiry, initiated by a charge sheet dated October 13, 2023, was still pending despite his retirement on October 31, 2023. The petitioner sought a direction for its expeditious conclusion. The respondents/State, through their counsel, submitted that if the enquiry was indeed pending, it would be concluded within a period of three months. The judgment does not record any specific statutory provisions or precedents relied upon by either party, other than the general submission regarding the pendency and conclusion of the enquiry.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
1 / 3
2025:CGHC:13223
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR WPS No. 1893 of 2025 1 William Ekka S/o Late Francis Ekka Aged About 64 Years R/o Village And Post- Singibahar, Tahsil Farsabahar, Distt. Jashpur (C.G.)
... Petitioner(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Secretary, Department Of Commercial Tax (Registration), Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt.- Raipur (C.G.) 2 Inspector General Of Registration And Superintendent Of Stamps Chhattisgarh, 2nd Floor, Commercial Tax Department - Gst Building, North Block, Sector- 19, Nava Raipur, Distt- Raipur (C.G.) 3 District Registrar, Raigarh, Distt. Raigarh (C.G.) 4 District Registrar, Janjgir (Inquiry Officer), Distt - Janjgir Champa (C.G.)
... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioners : Ms. Priyanka Rai, Advocate For Respondents/ State : Ms. Poorva Tiwari, P.L. JYOTI SHARMA JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.03.21 10:35:24 +0530
2 / 3 (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 20/03/2025
The petitioner, who was a retired Sub Regist
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Chhattisgarh High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.