← Library
High Court of DelhiW.P.(C)/8406/2018

S. Baa v. The Secretary Ministry Of Culture And ANR

2020-01-14Hon'Ble Mr. Justice A. K. Chawla2 pages

$~22 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 8406/2018 & CM APPL. 32310/2018 S. BAA ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. S.C. Soren, Advocate.

versus THE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF CULTURE AND ANR.

.... Respondents Through:

Mr.

Rajesh Gogna, CGSC with Ms.Rahella Khan, Advocate for R-1 & R-2.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R

% 14.01.2020 By the instant petition, the petitioner seeks diverse reliefs directed against one Sh. G.C. Joshi, who at one point of time was the Director, Centre for Cultural Resources and Training (CCRT), Ministry of Culture, Govt. of India.

The petition is founded on the allegations that said Sh. Joshi was involved in corruption and had committed various acts of financial irregularities. Inter alia, he is stated to have issued the compulsory retirement order of the petitioner by misleading the Executive Committee of CCRT. As observed to earlier, though, the prayers made in the petition are diverse and run into 3-4 pages, the fact remains that in the instant petition, the petitioner has not extended challenge to the specific order of his compulsory retirement. In the submissions of Mr. Soren, to assail the said order he has approached the Commission for SC and ST and the petitioner

reserves the right to avail the other legal remedy as well. Be that as it may, the petition as founded is only for the alleged misconduct of said Mr. Joshi and Mr.Gogna, ld. Standing Counsel for the respondents on his part submits that the appropriate actions were initiated against said Sh. Joshi and on an FIR registered for the criminal acts of omission and/or commission, Mr. Joshi was not only charge-sheeted, he was arrested also and that the trial for the commission of the offences is going on. Though, ld. counsel for the petitioner feigns ignorance of any such developments, the Court is of the considered view that the allegations made in the petition may be looked into by the appropriate authorities of the respondents, in the first instance. Taking into account the totality of facts and circumstances, the instant petition is disposed of with the direction to the respondents to treat the instant petition as a representation of the petitioner and having considered it on its own merits, dispose it off, in accordance with law. Petition stands disposed of accordingly.

A. K. CHAWLA, J JANUARY 14, 2020 nn