New Delhi [India], February 27 : The Delhi High Court on Friday overturned a decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) that had quashed disciplinary proceedings against IRS officer Sameer Danyadev Wankhede.
The High Court's ruling allows the Union government and the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) to proceed with the departmental inquiry.
A Division Bench of Justices Anil Kshetarpal and Amit Mahajan held that the Tribunal should not have interfered at the stage when only a charge memorandum had been issued.
The Court observed that a charge memo is merely the beginning of disciplinary proceedings and does not amount to a finding of guilt. Therefore, judicial intervention at such an early stage should be rare and limited to exceptional cases.
The disciplinary action against Wankhede is linked to developments arising out of the 2021 Cordelia cruise drug seizure case, during his tenure as a Zonal Director with the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB). The case had drawn nationwide attention after the arrest of Aryan Khan, the son of actor Shah Rukh Khan.
After returning to his parent cadre under CBIC, Wankhede was issued a charge memorandum dated August 18, 2025. He approached the CAT, challenging the memo, arguing that the preliminary inquiry findings could not form the basis of disciplinary action and that the process adopted was unfair and biased. The Tribunal accepted his plea in January 2026, quashed the charge memo, and restrained the authorities from continuing the inquiry. It also made observations suggesting bias and malice on the part of the government.
The Union government challenged this decision before the High Court, contending that the CAT exceeded its powers by stopping the proceedings at the threshold.
The Centre argued that courts and tribunals generally do not interfere with a charge-sheet unless it is completely without jurisdiction or clearly illegal. It further submitted that the material relied upon, including a call transcript already placed on record in related proceedings before the Bombay High Court, required proper examination through a departmental process.
Accepting the government's arguments, the High Court set aside the CAT's order and restored the disciplinary proceedings. The ruling reaffirms the principle that departmental inquiries should ordinarily be allowed to continue without judicial interruption at the initial stage, leaving questions of merit to be examined during the inquiry itself.