R is a RTI activist. He obtained several documents which prove many irregularities committed by a Govt Emp A.
R filed compliant on the irregularities of A to his department. R also had attached all RTI based material evidences against A. Based on the compliant, the Department had initiated inquiry proceedings against A. The charges were extremely severe which amount to removal from service.
Now, A filed Writ of mandamus stating that he was not given a fair opportunity to defend his case which is against natural justice and prayed for necessary directions to his department. He also pleaded for staying all departmental inquiry proceedings until finality arrives. The court had sent a notice on why the case should not be admitted (NBA) as well as stayed the inquiry proceedings. The case was posted to a later date say X.
On the day X, the said WP was not listed for hearing and the status was continued to show as "Pending - NBA" (NBA = Notice Before Admission) and the same old date X is reflecting as the next listing date which is a past date now.
Now my questions are as follows.
1. How long the case can be in the same status without listing for next hearing. (Its an indirect way, the petitioner will enjoy the stay on inquiry proceedings as long as the petition is not heard.)
2. R tried verifying with the concerned Govt pleader who supposed to file counter on behalf of the department conducting inquiry but he refused to talk to R. R also tried to connect to HC scrutiny officer and he also refused to talk on this case. R tried to connect the dots that the govt pleader and HC scrutiny officer had some sort of dark understanding with the petitioner A to save him.
Now how do R move the case forward. What are the options he has?
3. Since the court had issued NBA (Notice before admission), is it correct to understand that the case is not yet admitted. Without admitting the case, is it possible to issue a stay on proceedings?
4. Is there any other option by which R can vacate the stay and let the departmental inquiry proceed further.
R is absolutely fine if A get aggrieved with the outcome of departmental inquiry and then A may approach court of law. But not allowing the inquiry itself is something very disappointing. Please help R.
I look forward for your advice for R.
