POST OFFICE REGULATIONS – 2024 -1

 1000 TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -72
254. Departmental Proceedings are Quasi-judicial in nature

Though departmental inquiries are not judicial proceedings before a court of law but they also do not fall within day to day administrative routine. The Supreme Court has held that the departmental proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature
[Union of India v. H.C. Goel, AIR 1964 SC 364; U.P. State Ware housing Corpn. v. V.N. Vajpayee, AIR 1980 SC 840].

255. Implications of the Departmental proceedings being Quasi-judicial
The following implications flow from the far-reaching decision of the Supreme Court that departmental proceedings are quasi-judicial in nature :

(i) such proceedings can be initiated only by the authority i.e., the disciplinary authority or any other authority empowered in this behalf by the rules;

(ii) the Principles of Natural Justice have full applicability to these proceedings. In other words, not only the authorities taking the decision should be impartial but they must also afford a reasonable opportunity of defence to the employee;

(iii) the proceedings must be held in accordance with the prescribed procedure;

(iv) the report of inquiry and also final decision must be based on the evidence adduced during the inquiry. Nothing can be taken into account against the employee unless he was given due notice of it and an opportunity to rebut it;

(v) the inquiring authority is bound to consider all relevant material put forth during the inquiry. He cannot ignore any material part of it.

(vi) the inquiry officer enjoins independence of functioning and is not subject to directions of the disciplinary authority or anyone else except on routine things as expediting the inquiry;

(vii) the report of inquiry must be a reasoned document containing analysis of the evidence with the findings logically flowing from it;

(viii) the disciplinary authority must apply his mind to the matter. He cannot act under orders or directions of someone else. No doubt, he may take advice but final decision must be his own;

(ix) the final order must be a speaking order, i.e., containing reasons for the conclusions reached;

(x) the order, once made, is not subject to modification by the same authority;

(xi) no higher authority can also revise the order in appeal or otherwise unless such a power is expressly bestowed upon him by some enactment or statutory rule; and

(xii) lastly, but probably the most important, the renowned dictum of Lord Hewart - “justice should not only be done but should manifestly and undoubtedly be seem to be done.” The charged officer must have a real feeling that he had a fair deal.