New Delhi, Feb 28 (IANS) The Delhi High Court has put aside the order issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) relating to the process for taking motion towards senior IRS official Sameer Wankhede in reference to the Aryan Khan medicine case.
Wankhede, who’s an Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer of the 2008 batch, is presently serving as an Additional Commissioner underneath the Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance.
A division bench of Justice Rekha Palli and Justice Rajnish Bhatnagar, partially allowed the Central authorities’s attraction towards the order of the CAT, in favour of Wankhede, a former NCB Mumbai Zone Director, towards whom sure allegations had been raised relating to the “conduct of the raid/investigation” in reference to the Aryan Khan medicine case.
Wankhede had filed an utility looking for quashing of a report dated June 16, 2022, ready by the Special Enquiry Team, led by Narcotics Control Bureau Deputy Director General Gyaneshwar Singh.
During this tenure, Wankhede obtained some data, on the premise of which a raid was carried out on the Cordelia Cruise. Post this, sure allegations had been raised towards Wankhede relating to the “conduct of the raid/investigation”. To probe these allegations, an SET was fashioned inside the NCB, which subsequently submitted its report, together with associated paperwork, to the Ministry of Home Affairs.
Wankhede had argued that Gyaneshwar Singh, who was the Chairman of the SET, was actively concerned in supervising the investigation of the above-mentioned crime, and that it was a violation of the ideas of pure justice for Singh to move the SET investigating his personal case.
Upon a radical examination of the case and the WhatsApp proof, the CAT bench, consisting of Chairman Justice Ranjit More and Member (A) Anand Mathur, had additionally concluded Gyaneshwar Singh, being actively concerned within the investigation, couldn’t have been the a part of the SET.
Consequently, the tribunal had directed the related authorities to grant a private listening to to Wankhede earlier than any motion is taken, making certain that any determination is communicated with a reasoned and clear order.
The excessive court docket now has concurred with the Central authorities’s argument that the directive to offer a private listening to and problem a reasoned order earlier than initiating any motion towards Wankhede contradicted the provisions of the CCS (CCA) Rules.
Setting apart this side of the CAT’s order, the excessive court docket, nevertheless, clarified that its determination doesn’t hinder Wankhede’s capacity to problem the order, if he needs to take action.
The Centre had contested the CAT’s order, asserting that it was faulty because the Tribunal did not recognise that the CCS (CCA) Rules don’t mandate offering a private listening to to a delinquent worker earlier than issuing a cost sheet. Meanwhile, Wankhede’s counsel argued that Wankhede himself was aggrieved by CAT’s determination. The Tribunal had famous Wankhede’s considerations relating to Singh’s involvement in issuing instructions throughout the investigation, regardless of being appointed because the Chairman of the SET.
Recently, Wankhede filed a contempt plea towards Singh, alleging non-compliance with the Tribunal’s order. A single decide had dismissed the petition, stating that it was not maintainable, however granted Wankhede the freedom to hunt redressal of his grievances by means of the CAT.
