C.C.S. (C.C.A.) RULES, 1965 – PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
(Selective Judgments )
11. It was contended that regard being had to the preliminary
proceedings, the accused employee should be taken to have known all about the
charges. It was held that whether he knew it or not, he must again be told of
the charges which must be specific and all particulars must be stated, without
which a man cannot defend himself. It is obvious, therefore, that there was no
duty cast upon the accused employee to connect the charge-sheet with any
previous proceedings.
[A.R. Mukherjee v. Eastern Rly. (1962)
2 LLJ 537; AIR 1961 Cal. 40.]
12.
Confession at the stage of preliminary investigation will not obviate regular
inquiry
If any statement is made during
preliminary inquiry, then its copy should be supplied to the employee concerned
and he should be given a chance to explain or rebut the said evidence. In the
absence of any such inquiry it will not be fair to strain the facts and to hold
that in view of the admissions the inquiry will not serve any useful purpose.
[Jagdish prasad Saxena v. State of
M.B., AIR 1961 SC 1070; (1963) 1
LLJ 325.]
13. Records of the
preliminary inquiry/investigation may not be produced during departmental
inquiry if the same are not proposed to be relied upon to prove the charges
The evidence recorded during
preliminary inquiry is to enable the employer to make up his mind whether to
proceed against the delinquent employee or not and if it is not produced during
departmental inquiry then there is no defect.
[Indreswar v. Union of India, AIR 1959
ASS 112.]
14. Where the
investigating officer's report on the basis of which disciplinary proceedings
were started was not made available but there is nothing to indicate that the
Inquiry Officer placed any reliance on that report, there is no violation of
the principles of natural justice.
[ Nripendra Nath Bagchi v. Government
of W.B, (1961) 2 LLJ 312;AIR
Cal. 1.]
15. Records of the
preliminary inquiry/investigation should be open to inspection by the charged
employee if the same are proposed to be relied upon to prove the charges
When copies of statements recorded
during preliminary inquiry were not supplied in spite of request and the
statements were relied upon by the Inquiry Officer, then principles of natural
justice are violated.
[D.S. Nadkarni v. S.K. Sukhtankar,
(1973) SLR 615 (Bom. H.C.).]
16. Since statements
recorded at preliminary stage do not form part of the formal inquiry
proceedings they cannot be utilized at that stage unless they are brought on
record and are used either for corroborating or contradicting any witness whose
evidence was recorded at preliminary stage. If the Inquiry Officer wants to use
them they must be used with the full knowledge of the delinquent employee,
otherwise the inquiry will be vitiated.
[Choudhury v. Union of India, AIR
1956, Cal. 662.]
17. The preliminary
inquiry report was made the basis of the regular departmental inquiry but the
copy of the preliminary inquiry report was not supplied to the charged
employee. It was held by the Punjab and Haryana High Court that the employee
was prejudiced by non-compliance with the principles of natural justice. It was
held that in judicial and quasi judicial inquiry, any material that is used
against the accused to his prejudice has to be brought to his notice so that he
may have his own say in that regard. Therefore, when the preliminary inquiry
report was the basis of the regular departmental inquiry non-supply of copy of
such report vitiates the inquiry for violation of the principles of natural
justice.
[D.C. Aggrwal v. S.B.I., 1991 Lab IC
1618 (P. & H. High Court).]
18. When the Inquiry
Officer has looked to the report of investigating officer and collected
information which influenced his determination and when the Investigating
Officer himself appeared as a witness during inquiry to explain certain points
the refusal to permit inspection of the report resulted in violation of the
rules of natural justice.
[Director, P.&T. v. N.G. Majumdar,
1974 Lab IC 1484 (Cal. H.C.).]
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSir
ReplyDeleteSelective judgements of preliminary investigation presented impressive for writing replies,🙏