The Central Administrative Tribunal ruled that disciplinary action against IRS officer Sameer Wankhede is legally untenable, citing violation of court directions and improper reliance on barred preliminary enquiry material
IRS officer Sameer Wankhede. File pic
The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Principal Bench, New Delhi, has ruled that disciplinary proceedings against IRS officer Sameer Wankhede are legally untenable, as the charge memorandum issued to him relied on material from a preliminary enquiry whose use had already been prohibited by judicial orders, news agency ANI reported.
The tribunal held that the authorities acted in violation of settled legal principles and binding court directions by proceeding on the basis of such material.
In its order dated January 19, 2026, CAT examined Wankhede’s challenge to the charge memorandum issued on August 18, 2025, and observed that the charge sheet was “premised upon” the evidence and findings of a Special Enquiry Team (SET), ANI reported. The tribunal noted that both it and constitutional courts had earlier made it clear that findings of a preliminary enquiry cannot be used to frame charges in departmental proceedings.
The bench observed that once courts had restrained the use of SET material for disciplinary action, the respondents were duty-bound to comply with those directions.
According to the tribunal, the same evidentiary foundation amounted to a mechanical exercise without independent application of mind and was violative of service jurisprudence and principles of fairness.
It also took note of a series of earlier proceedings in which it had already directed that evidence recorded during the preliminary inquiry, including the SET report, could not be used in any departmental inquiry against the officer, ANI reported.
These directions had also been noticed and reiterated by the Delhi High Court, which clarified that findings of a preliminary enquiry cannot form the basis of disciplinary charges.
Despite these clear pronouncements, the respondents issued the impugned charge memorandum relying on the very same material. CAT held that such an approach not only undermined judicial discipline but also rendered the disciplinary action legally untenable.
The tribunal further noted that the material relied upon in the charge memorandum was already the subject matter of proceedings pending before the Bombay High Court, where interim protection had been granted to Wankhede. Initiating and continuing departmental proceedings on the same basis, while the matter was sub judice, was found to be improper, reported ANI.
In view of these findings, CAT confirmed its earlier interim order staying the departmental enquiry and restrained the authorities from proceeding further pursuant to the impugned charge memorandum. It clarified that any future action against the officer must strictly adhere to the law and cannot, directly or indirectly, rely on evidence collected during the preliminary SET enquiry.
Wankhede, a 2008-batch IRS officer and former zonal director of the Narcotics Control Bureau, Mumbai, has faced multiple proceedings arising from high-profile narcotics investigations. Over the years, several courts have intervened to clarify the limits on the use of preliminary inquiry material against him.
(With ANI inputs)
Subscribe today by clicking the link and stay updated with the latest news!" Click here!
