New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has come down heavily on the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) for its slow handling of disciplinary proceedings involving IRS officer Sameer Wankhede (IRS–C&IT: 2008), and has directed the tribunal to decide the matter on January 14 or within ten days thereafter.
The court passed the order while refusing to interfere with CAT’s earlier decision staying the disciplinary proceedings against Wankhede, which are linked to allegations arising out of the 2021 Cordelia cruise drugs case.
HC Criticises Delay, Sets Firm Timeline
A Division Bench comprising Justice Anil Kshetarpal and Justice Amit Mahajan, while hearing a petition filed by the Union of India, observed that the disciplinary inquiry had been stayed since August, and no effective steps had been taken for nearly five months.
The bench remarked on the lackadaisical approach of the tribunal and stressed that once the matter is listed for final hearing, it must be decided expeditiously.
“The tribunal will make sincere efforts for the disposal of the OA (Original Application) on January 14 or within the next ten days from 14 January. The Tribunal will proceed to decide the OA uninfluenced by the interim order,” the bench said while disposing of the Centre’s petition.
HC Refuses to Interfere With CAT’s Stay Order
The Delhi High Court refused to interfere with the CAT’s interim order dated August 27, 2025, which had stayed the disciplinary inquiry against Wankhede. However, it made it clear that the tribunal must now adjudicate the matter independently and without being influenced by the interim protection earlier granted.
The HC consciously refrained from making any observations on the merits of the CAT’s impugned order.
Background: Allegations Linked to Cordelia Cruise Case
Sameer Wankhede came into national focus following the Cordelia cruise drug bust case in 2021, during his tenure as an officer of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB), Mumbai.
He has been accused of allegedly demanding ₹25 crore from Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan’s family, allegedly threatening to implicate actor Aryan Khan in the case. These allegations later led to a CBI probe, during which a regular case was registered alleging that a bribe was sought from an accused.
Disciplinary Proceedings Before CAT
Before the CAT, Wankhede filed an Original Application (OA) challenging the disciplinary inquiry initiated against him. The inquiry relates to allegations that he:
Sought confidential information related to the Cordelia probe from NCB’s legal department after being relieved from the agency
Asked for an “assurance” from an NCB legal officer to allegedly “steer the investigation”
CAT had stayed the inquiry, citing circumstances including earlier judicial protection granted to Wankhede.
Centre’s Argument and HC’s Observation
The Union of India challenged CAT’s stay order before the Delhi High Court, arguing that the tribunal had erred by relying on an interim protection granted by the Bombay High Court, which had restrained the CBI from taking coercive action against Wankhede in a corruption case.
The Centre also submitted that a transcript placed on record suggested that one Japaan Babu was being pressured to share information related to an unconnected matter, which, according to the government, stalled the inquiry.
However, the HC questioned the Centre, observing that despite the inquiry being stayed in August, the authorities had not demonstrated any concrete prejudice caused by the stay.
Wankhede’s Stand
Wankhede’s counsel informed the court that the matter was already listed for final hearing on January 14 before CAT and submitted that it would be appropriate for the tribunal to decide the case finally instead of prolonging interim litigation.
Accepting this position, the High Court disposed of the Centre’s petition with clear directions to the CAT.
Direction to Decide Independently
The High Court directed that the tribunal should decide the original application uninfluenced by the interim order, and underscored the need for timely adjudication in disciplinary matters involving senior civil servants.
