The Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT)'s principal bench on Monday set aside the disciplinary charge framed against Indian Revenue Service (IRS) officer Sameer Wankhede by Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) and restrained the authorities from proceeding further on the basis of the charge memorandum [Sameer Wankhede Vs Union of India].
A Bench of Justice Ranjit More (Chairman) and Rajinder Kashyap (Member–Administrative) allowed Wankhede’s challenge to Charge Memorandum no. 30/2025 dated August 18, 2025.
"The impugned Charge Memorandum dated 18.08.2025 (Annexure A/1) is quashed and set aside with all consequential benefits in accordance with law and rules on the subject," the tribunal held.
The tribunal also took exception to authorities for acting in a biased manner against Wankhede said that their actions seemed to be borne out of malice.
"The motive involved in the issuance of the charge sheet is driven by the above biased considerations, and the inquiry would be a mere farcical show, the conclusion of which is already well known. Hence, we interfere at this stage itself to avoid further harassment and humiliation of the applicant," the CAT said.
It criticised the conduct of CBIC and termed its actions as an attempt to stall the promotion of Wankhede.
"The chain of events unmistakably demonstrates that the impugned Charge Memorandum bears no real nexus with the purported allegations but appears to be retaliation of respondents arising out of a number of decisions in the matters of the applicant and also is looked as an endeavour to stall the promotion of the applicant. Such conduct is ex facie demonstrative of malice in law and personal vendetta and colourable exercise of power," the judgment stated.
It also said that it is inclined to impose costs on CBIC but is refraining from doing so with the hope that the CBIC would mend its ways.
"For the reasons deliberated in this order, we impose a great restraint on ourselves and refrain from imposing heavy costs on the respondents, with the hope that they will mend their ways and establish an administrative mechanism that upholds the rule of law," the CAT said.
Wankhede is a 2008-batch IRS officer. He served as Mumbai Zonal Director of the Narcotics Control Bureau between 2020 and January 2022. During this period, NCB Mumbai registered Cordelia Cruise drug case involving Bollywood actor Shah Rukh Khan's son Aryan Khan.
Later, allegations were raised regarding procedural lapses in the investigation. A special enquiry team (SET) was then constituted by the NCB.
The SET submitted its report in June 2022.
Wankhede then challenged the SET report before CAT. He contended that the officer heading the enquiry had himself supervised the investigation in the Cordelia cruise case.
The CAT in August 2023 accepted this contention and held that the officer concerned, being actively involved in the investigation in Cordelia case, could not have been the part of SET.
The Tribunal also recorded that the SET report was only a preliminary enquiry.
That legal position was subsequently affirmed by the Delhi High Court. The High Court clarified that the findings of a preliminary enquiry cannot be used to indict an employee in disciplinary proceedings.
Meanwhile, in May 2023, the Central Bureau of Investigation registered an FIR against Wankhede. The FIR was based on the same material that formed part of the SET report. Wankhede then approached the Bombay High Court. The High Court granted him interim protection from coercive action. That protection has continued and the criminal proceedings remain pending.
Despite these judicial directions, CBIC issued a charge memorandum on August 18, 2025. The charge alleged that Wankhede, after being transferred out of NCB, sought confidential information from NCB’s legal advisor and attempted to influence the course of the investigation.
Wankhede then challenged the same before CAT.
The CAT in its judgment on Monday noted that the charge memorandum relied on the same transcripts and material which were part of the preliminary enquiry and also formed the basis of the pending criminal case.
"The respondents in gross disregard to the above mentioned stay order stopping further action on their part have moved ahead and now resorted to issuance of major penalty/proceedings against the applicant vide the impugned Charge Memorandum," the CAT said.
The tribunal traced the entire litigation history across multiple proceedings before the CAT and the High Courts. It held that the respondents were repeatedly attempting to proceed against Wankhede on material already judicially held to be unusable for disciplinary purposes.
It concluded that disciplinary proceedings could not be sustained on such material, particularly when the same issues were sub-judice before the Bombay High Court. The charge memorandum was accordingly set aside.
"For the reasons deliberated in this Order, we impose a great restraint on ourselves and refrain from imposing heavy costs on the respondents, with the hope that they will mend their ways and establish an administrative mechanism that upholds the rule of law."
Sameer Wankhede was represented by Advocates Ajesh Luthra, Jatin Parashar and Meenu Sharma.
The Union of India and the Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs were represented by Senior Advocate Ravi Prakash with Advocates Hanu Bhaskar, Astu Khandelwal and Yasharth.
[Read Judgment]