IPS officer Satish Verma moves SC challenging Delhi HC orders which led to his dismissal

Verma moved the Supreme Court last week with two petitions challenging two Delhi High Court orders which allowed his dismissal by an order of the MHA’s Police-I division dated August 30 this year, a month before his superannuation. The dismissal order came following a departmental inquiry that proved the charges against him, including interacting “with public media” when he was Chief Vigilance Officer (CVO) of North Eastern Electric Power Corporation (NEEPCO).

The Delhi High Court, which has been hearing Verma’s challenge against the charge sheet issued to him in September 2021, had allowed the disciplinary authority to go ahead with its proceedings but had ordered it to not take any “precipitative steps” against him. On August 30 this year, a division bench of the high court permitted passing of the final order after the Centre said the disciplinary proceedings had been concluded. However, the court also said the same shall not be implemented without the court’s permission if it is prejudicial to Verma.

The Centre, soon thereafter on September 6, moved an application before the Delhi high court seeking nod to impose the disciplinary authority’s decision to dismiss Verma from service. Permitting the Centre to implement the order, the division bench headed by Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva on September 6 said, “It is directed that the order shall not be implemented till 19.09.2022, to enable the petitioner to avail of his remedies in accordance with law against the order of dismissal.”

Challenging the Delhi High Court’s direction permitting the Centre to implement the dismissal order, Verma has argued before the Supreme Court that his superannuation could not cause any “legitimate prejudice” to the Union government as the statutory rules in respect of the All India Services envisage appropriate penalties even after retirement on conclusion of the departmental enquiries initiated earlier.

Verma’s counsel advocate Sarim Naved told The Indian Express, “We have only until 19th. We hope for a date (of hearing) on the 16th or 19th (of September)”. In the petition before the Supreme Court, Verma has said the Centre’s application dated September 6 was not even served on him and the court order was passed without issuing notice.

Notably, the order of dismissal from service makes no mention that the order is not to be implemented, at least until September 19 and only notes that the said order is “passed in pursuance of and subject to the directions of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court issued vide Order dated 30.08.2022.”

As an interim relief before the Supreme Court, Verma is seeking a stay on the Delhi high court orders.  The dismissal order follows the departmental charge sheet initiating disciplinary proceedings against Verma in August 2018. 

Among the charges Verma faced included allegedly misusing official premises of NEEPCO, Shillong, in 2016 when as the then CVO, he “interacted with public media” and “made such statement of fact and opinion on his communication over public media, in the matter of encounter of a terrorist Ishrat Jahan in Gujarat, which had the effect of an adverse criticism of action of the Central government and the state government, which is capable of embarrassing the relations between the Central government and the state government and which is also capable of affecting the relationship of India with a neighbouring country.”

It was also alleged in the departmental charge sheet that Verma had taken “recourse to the press (electronic media) for the vindication of official acts which have been the subject matter of adverse criticism and attack of a defamatory character… to counter the statements of Shri G K Pillai, the then secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India and Shri R.V.S Mani, the then Under Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs.”

The order of dismissal in August notes that the inquiring authority in December 2020 submitted a report to the ministry holding all the charges as proven, following which Verma submitted his representation to the ministry in January 2021, which was rejected by the ministry’s disciplinary authority on the grounds of being “misleading and without merit”.

The ministry had further sought an opinion from UPSC and the latter had advised that “the ends of justice would be met in this case if Verma was penalised with dismissal from service, which shall ordinarily be a disqualification for future employment under the government”. Verma in October 2021 submitted that “the charges stood not proved against him and therefore, he deserved exoneration”.

Ultimately, the dismissal order upheld the UPSC’s advice, disqualifying him from future government employment.

Verma probed the Ishrat Jahan case between April 2010 and October 2011 and it was based on his report that the SIT had held that the encounter was “fake”. The Gujarat high court had subsequently entrusted the investigation to the CBI and a direction was also issued to the CBI to avail Verma’s services. Notably, Verma, as a member of the SIT, had approached the Gujarat high court in June 2012 after the state started an inquiry against him for seizing a hard disk from the forensic science laboratory (FSL) which purportedly contained evidence pertaining to the encounter, and had been concealed by the FSL until then.