Chennai: Madras high court has clarified that a mere pendency of a criminal case does not automatically require departmental disciplinary proceedings against a govt employee to be kept in abeyance till the disposal of the criminal case.“The purpose of departmental inquiry and of prosecution is two different and distinct aspects. The criminal prosecution is launched for an offence for violation of a duty the offended owes to the society, or for breach of which law has provided that the offender shall make satisfaction to the public,” a division bench of Justice S M Subramaniam and Justice N Senthilkumar said on Friday.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 the efficiency of public service. It would, therefore, be expedient that the disciplinary proceedings are conducted and completed as expeditiously as possible, the court added.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 consideration in the backdrop of its own facts and circumstances, the judges said.The court passed the order while allowing an appeal moved by the conservator of forests, Dharmapuri circle challenging a single judge order that stayed departmental inquiry against a superintendent in the forest engineering department in view of pending criminal prosecution.There is no doubt that the departmental proceedings in corruption cases can go on independently, dehors the pendency of the criminal proceedings. The delinquent govt servant has got a duty to defend both criminal cases and disciplinary proceedings separately to prove his/her innocence, the judges said.
