Delhi High Court Directs Officials To Approach Tribunal In Arvind Kejriwal Bungalow Renovation Case

The Delhi High Court on Thursday granted six PWD officials the liberty to approach the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) against the issuance of show cause notices to them over alleged "gross violation" of rules in the renovation of Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal's official residence.

A bench of Chief Justice Satish Chandra Sharma and Justice Sanjeev Narula disposed of an appeal by the Delhi government's Directorate of Vigilance and Special Secretary (Vigilance) challenging a single judge bench order of no coercive action against the PWD officials who were issued show cause notices.

The high court relied on a judgment of the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court and said it is very clear that in respect of a service dispute, an application has to be preferred under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act at the first instance.

Therefore, the writ petition by the PWD officials before the single judge was not at all maintainable, and it should have been dismissed at the threshold, the division bench said.

It said, "The fact remains that the Constitution bench... has arrived at the conclusion that the tribunals will continue to act like courts of first instance in respect of the areas of law for which they have been constituted. It is not, therefore, open for litigants to directly approach the high courts even in cases where they question the vires of statutory legislation (except where the legislation that creates that particular tribunal is challenged) by overlooking the jurisdiction of the tribunal concerned." The division bench disposed of the petition pending before the single judge and granted liberty to the six PWD officials to approach the CAT by filing an original application under the Administrative Tribunals Act.

"It is made clear that this court has not observed anything on merit except the issue of the maintainability of the writ petition in the LPA. With the aforesaid observations, the present LPA stands disposed of," it said.

An appeal by a petitioner against a decision of a single judge before a different bench of the same court is known as a Letter Patents Appeal (LPA).

The Directorate of Vigilance, in its appeal, sought to set aside a September 15 interim order of a single judge of the high court, which said no coercive steps shall be taken by any authority against the petitioner PWD officials till October 12.

The appellants raised a preliminary objection, saying the writ petition was not at all maintainable as the officials are central government employees, and for the challenge in respect of disciplinary action, they had to approach the CAT.

The single judge had passed the interim order after taking serious exception to the city authorities failing to exercise restraint and taking contravening steps despite an undertaking given by its counsel that no coercive steps would be taken against the officials. Senior advocate Rahul Mehra and Delhi government standing counsel Santosh Kumar Tripathi had given the undertaking before the single judge.

However, the Directorate of Vigilance, in its appeal filed through advocates Yoginder Handoo and Mananjay Mishra, contended the assurance was without authorisation by the competent authority.

The Directorate of Vigilance had issued show cause notices to six PWD officials over an alleged violation of rules in the renovation of Kejriwal's official residence. The notices issued to the chief engineers concerned and other PWD officials asked them to explain their actions.

The single judge of the high court had passed the order shielding the six Public Works Department (PWD) officials from coercive action while hearing their petition, filed through senior advocate Mohit Mathur, seeking quashing of the show cause notices issued to them on June 19 by the Special Secretary (Vigilance) on the ground that they were issued by the top officer "without jurisdiction and competence, with premeditation and with a closed mind, in complete abuse of the process of law".

It said the notices were the "outcome of a political tussle between the Lieutenant Governor of Delhi and the ruling party in the NCT of Delhi" in which the petitioners were made "scapegoats".

The PWD officials said in their petition they did not violate any rule, statute, or office order, and the work undertaken with regard to the chief minister's official bungalow was in full discharge and in due course of their official duties.

"The petitioner(s) followed the instructions of the minister of PWD, GNCTD (Government of the National Capital Territory of Delhi), and have consistently performed their duties under his vigilant supervision. It will not be out of place to emphasize that the petitioner all along acted in good faith, with no default, lapse, or negligence on his part," their petition said.

The show cause notices to the officials, however, said the old structure was demolished without a survey report, and no building plan was sanctioned for the new building constructed by the PWD.

The notices asked the PWD officials to explain their version "as all such acts have been done by them in gross violation of general financial rules, the CPWD manual, and CVC guidelines".