SC directs Nagaland Govt to conclude IPS officer’s disciplinary proceedings in 6 months

Morung Express News
Dimapur | December 18

The Supreme Court has granted the Nagaland Government the liberty to conclude disciplinary proceedings initiated against an Indian Police Service (IPS) officer but also has directed that the process must be completed within six months.

No extension would be given if the deadline lapses, the apex court stated, while further directing the petitioner, the IPS officer of the Nagaland cadre, to co-operate with the disciplinary proceedings.

“We make it clear that the petitioner shall co-operate with such proceedings and if the petitioner co-operates and still the proceedings could not be completed with the aforesaid time limit or for the lapse on the part of the authorities, no further time would be granted,” stated the order issued by Justice CT Ravikumar and Justice Sanjay Kumar while disposing a Special Leave Petition (SLP) on December 12.

The SLP was filed by Richard Yimto, challenging the judgment of a writ petition passed by the Gauhati High Court, Kohima Bench on March 16, 2022. Yimto is currently IGP (Village Guard) in the Nagaland Police hierarchy. 

“The main grievance of the petitioner is regarding the inordinate delay in conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him vide Memorandum of Charge dated 18.12.2018,” the Supreme Court observed.

In the December 12 order, the Judges observed both the sides’ contentions. The petitioner claimed that the delay in concluding the disciplinary proceedings against him was due to “latches on the part of the authorities,” or taking too long to assert their case against him. 

On the other, the state/respondents attributed the delay to “non co-operation on the part of the petitioner.”

The Court also took note that the petitioner is set to retire on December 31, 2023. Considering this, the Judges said that it was “absolutely unnecessary” to consider validity of either of the contention.

It further observed that there cannot be any doubt with respect to the legal position that once an employee attains the age of superannuation, the employee-employer relationship gets severed, implying the employee would be “beyond the disciplinary control of the authority.” 

However, the Supreme Court noted that the provisions of law permit continuation of the disciplinary proceedings, initiated when the incumbent was in service, beyond the age of retirement of the person for limited purpose(s). 

Accordingly, the Court granted liberty to the respondents— Government of Nagaland represented by the Chief Secretary; Principal Secretary and Home Commissioner, Home Department and Director General of Police to continue the proceedings even if it cannot be completed before the petitioner’s retirement. 

It came with the caveat that the disciplinary proceedings be completed within six months from the date of retirement.

Case background 
The case pertains to 2018 when suspected brown sugar, weighing 6.9 kg, was seized by the police Narcotics personnel on August 3 at the Khuzama inter-state check-post. Weeks later, the impounded contraband was later recovered from the official quarters of Yimto, then IGP (CID) in Phesama on September 1.

The officer, as per reported in the news at the time, claimed that he took the drugs home for safety and further investigation. 

He was placed under suspension on October 25, but later reinstated into service after approaching the court citing non-filing of chargesheet against him in the case within the mandatory 90 days.
The disciplinary proceedings were subsequently initiated. In February 2021, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), choosing not to interfere with the proceedings, directed the authorities to conclude the proceedings, which were initiated via the ‘Memorandum of Charge’ (18.12.2018), within a period of six months.

Later in April 2021, the officer filed a Writ Petition in the HC Kohima Bench challenging the CAT’s non-interference directive.

In the petition, he sumitted that ShowCause Notice was issued by the DGP Nagaland as to why disciplinary proceedings “should not be issued against him.

Among others, he was accused of “failing to maintain absolute integrity in discharging of his bonafide Government duty by not registering a Police Case on the seizure of  suspected contraband Brown Sugar, release of two accused persons and the vehicle used in the transportation of the contraband narcotics and keeping the seized contraband in his personal custody”

Later Home Commissioner issued the “Memorandum of Charge’ incorporating the charges framed against the petitioner.  

In the meantime, an Enquiry Officer (EO) was appointed from the same department of the petitioner on December 3, 2018. The latter objected to this stating that the EO should be from outside the Department. Consequently, disciplinary proceedings were temporarily suspended followed by the appointment of an IAS officer to enquire into the charges held against the petitioner. 

In 2020, the petitioner filed an appeal before the CAT to declare the disciplinary proceedings initiated against him by the respondents as “illegal non est in the eye of law” and quashing it. The reason cited was delay in disposal of the case against him. 

As per the petitioner’s submission, the preliminary enquiry was conducted three months after the appointment of the Enquiry Officer. He cited the CAT taking note of the alleged delay and terming it as against the spirit of fairness and justice to the petitioner as well as general guideline issued by the Central Vigilance Commission and Judgment of the Supreme Court in the Prem Nath Bali case.

However, in its February 22, 2021 order, the CAT taking into “consideration the nature of charges as contained in the Memorandum of Charges,” declined to interfere with the disciplinary proceedings but directed the respondent authorities to complete same within six months. 

Aggrieved by the said CAT order, the IPS officer approached the HC Kohima Bench seeking for quashing of the entire disciplinary proceedings and for consequential reliefs.

During the course hearing, the Senior Additional Advocate General Nagaland submitted that the State would endeavour to complete the said disciplinary proceedings within six months. 

According, the HC Kohima Bench ruled on March 16, 2022 said that interference with the said disciplinary proceedings at this stage would not be in the interest of justice.

“From the point of prejudice caused to the petitioner, we have perused the pleadings and there is nothing shown how the petitioner had been prejudiced in defending himself in the disciplinary proceedings,” the Court then observed. 

However, the Court directed the disciplinary enquiry on the basis of the Memorandum of Articles of Charge (18.12.2018) be completed expeditiously and preferably by September 15, 2022 or period of six months from the date of its judgment. 

The deadline was missed. The IPS officer subsequently filled the SLP on June 2022 in the Supreme Court.