Departmental proceedings can continue despite a criminal trial when overlap alone does not justify staying disciplinary action.

Departmental proceedings need not be stayed merely because criminal trial arises from the same incident. Simultaneous continuation is permissible unless the criminal charge is grave and involves complicated questions of fact and law, and the balance of circumstances justifies suspension of disciplinary action. Here, factual overlap alone was insufficient because the departmental inquiry also concerned misconduct affecting integrity and conduct unbecoming of a judicial officer, which the criminal court would not separately decide. Delay in the criminal trial further supported refusal of a stay, so continuation of the disciplinary proceedings was justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the departmental proceedings could be stayed pending the criminal trial arising from the same incident.

Analysis: A stay of disciplinary action is not automatic merely because criminal proceedings are pending on similar facts. The governing principle is that both proceedings may run simultaneously, and stay is justified only where the criminal charge is grave and involves complicated questions of fact and law, while due regard must also be had to the need for expeditious disciplinary control and the effect of delay in the criminal case. On the facts, the disciplinary charges and criminal allegations overlapped, but the departmental inquiry also included misconduct going to integrity and conduct unbecoming of a judicial officer, which the criminal court would not independently adjudicate. The delay in the criminal trial further weighed against keeping the departmental proceedings in abeyance.

Conclusion: The request to stay the departmental proceedings was rightly refused, and continuation of the disciplinary proceedings was justified.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition failed because the Court found no legal or factual basis to halt the departmental inquiry pending the criminal case.

Ratio Decidendi: Departmental proceedings may continue simultaneously with criminal proceedings unless the criminal case is of grave nature involving complicated questions of fact and law and the balance of circumstances justifies a stay; mere overlap of facts does not warrant suspension of disciplinary action.

---