1000 TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -68
The Regular Hearing
Remitting the case for re-inquiry, where inquiry was not held properly
243. If the disciplinary authority is of opinion that the inquiry has not been held in accordance with the prescribed procedure or the principles of natural justice, thus resulting in failure of justice, he may remit the case back for further or fresh inquiry, pointing out the shortcomings noticed by him. However, if the inquiry has been held properly, a re-inquiry cannot be ordered.
Obtaining observations of charged employee on report of inquiry
244. The Supreme Court has held that before the report of inquiry is considered, a copy thereof should be supplied to the charged officer and his observations thereon, if any, obtained (Union of India v. Mohd. Ramzan Khan, AIR 1991 SC 471 confirmed in the Constitution Bench judgment in Managing Director, ECIL v. B. Karunakar, AIR 1994 SC 1074]. This requirement is mandatory in all departmental proceedings in all establishments whether Government or non-Government, Public or Private (B. Karunakar case, supra, p. 1092]. This requirement takes effect from 20th November, 1990 only, i.e., the date on which judgment in Mohd. Ramzan Khan case was delivered (ibid., p. 1096]
245. The Government of India have decided, vide. DOP&T Notification No. 11012/ 4/94-Estt. (A), dated 3.5.1995 that this requirement shall be followed in all cases even where the findings in inquiry are not adverse to the employee and also where inquiry was held by the disciplinary authority himself.
Post a Comment