In a landmark judgment, the Allahabad High Court has held that a competent authority can’t refuse prosecution sanction against an official if it is recommended by the Central Vigilance Commission (CVC). In that case, the authority must refer the disagreement to the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), rather than take a final decision.
According to the court, the competent authority, other than the President, cannot take the final decision contrary to the CVC’s advice itself and must refer the disagreement to the DoPT.
On this basis, the court upheld the sanction granted against a National Highways Authority of India (NHAI) employee and dismissed his challenge to the prosecution sanction resulting in chargesheet, cognizance and summoning order in a corruption case.
The High Court was hearing a petition challenging a chargesheet for offences under the Prevention of Corruption Act, the NHAI’s prosecution-sanction order and the Special Judge’s order taking cognizance and summoning the petitioner for trial.
A bench of Justice Subhash Vidyarthi passed the judgment, saying if the CBI has sought sanction for prosecution and the CVC has recommended it, and yet the competent authority proposes refusal, the case should be referred to the DoPT for final decision and the disciplinary authority does not have the authority to take a final decision declining to grant sanction for prosecution of an employee.
The case arose from a complaint alleging that an NHAI official had demanded a bribe for processing a no-objection certificate (NOC) for a fuel station. The CBI arranged a trap in which the official allegedly accepted part of the bribe. According to the CBI, the official stated that he had received the money on the petitioner’s behalf.
The CBI subsequently included the petitioner as an accused and sought sanction for his prosecution. The NHAI was against the sanction prosecution initially. But after the CVC’s advice to the NHAI, the competent authority reconsidered the matter and sanctioned the prosecution.
The petitioner contended that the competent authority had already refused sanction twice and could not review those decisions without fresh material.
The NHAI stated that the CVC had advised it to grant sanction under the procedure prescribed by the DoPT’s Office Memoranda and that the sanction was thereafter granted upon reconsideration.
Get Latest Updates