30th June retirees case - Supreme Court passed comments- noncompliance costs as well as interest may be imposed.

 33. Supply of documents – Principle of natural justice

158. The Principles of Natural Justice require that the copies of the documents which the department or management seeks to rely upon in proof of the charge and those required by the charged employee for his defence should be supplied to him. If the documents are voluminous and cannot be supplied to him, an opportunity has got to be given to him for inspection of the documents. It would be open to the delinquent to obtain appropriate extracts at his own expense. The copies of defence documents are also to be supplied to him (Committee of Management, K. D. College V. S.S. Pandey, (1995)1 SCC 404). The imperative need for supply of the copies of all official documents both in support of the charges and those required by the defence or providing with facility to take extracts or make out copies was also emphasized by the Supreme Court earlier in Kushinath Dikshita case, supra.

159. Where the rules so provide, cost of making out copies of defence documents can be recovered from the charged employee. (ibid.]

160. The Supreme Court has also held that the giving of copies of the documents or facility to take extracts etc. should be arranged before the inquiry starts and cannot be postponed to a later date [Committee of Management, K.D. College v. S.S. Pandey, (1995)1 SCC 404].

Though, normally, the report of investigation/preliminary inquiry is a confidential document and the charged employee may not have access over it but where the prosecution itself decides to rely upon this report to prove the charges, a copy thereof has to be given to the employee concerned [Krishna Chandra Tandon v. Union of India, AIR 1974 SC 1587].