152. Knowledge Spectrum – Discipline – CONDUCT OF INQUIRY 69.
201. Is it necessary for the IO and PO to be present during the inspection of listed documents by the CO?
Not necessarily. Para 3.7 of Chapter XI of the Vigilance Manual 1991 Ed provides that inspection of listed documents is to take place at "such place as the Inquiry Officer may direct in the presence of the Presenting Officer or any other gazetted officer deputed for the purpose by the disciplinary authority or the other authority having the custody of the records."
202. How to conduct inspection of listed documents which are held up in the court?
The following alternatives are open in respect of the documents held up in the court and required for inspection by the CO:
(a) An application may be made to the court for making the documents available at least temporarily
(b) If the above request is not allowed by the court, inspection of the documents by the CO may be arranged in the Court
Can a document sought by the CO for the purpose of defence be denied?
either of the two grounds. Firstly if the 10 is of the opinion that the document is not relevant to the case. In this case, the lo has to pass a reasoned order as prescribed in the proviso to Rule 14(12) of the CCA Rules.
In addition to the above, authority in possession of the documents may deny the production of documents for reasons to be recorded in writing that the production of the said document is against public interest.
In this connection, para 3.5 of Chapter XI of the Vigilance Manual (1991 Ed) provides as under:
3.5 Denial of access to documents which have a relevance to the case will amount to violation of the reasonable opportunity mentioned in Article 311 (2) of the Constitution. Access may not, therefore, be denied except on grounds of relevancy or in the public interest or in the interest of the security of the state. The question of relevancy has to be looked at from the point of view of the Government servant and if there is any possible line of defense to which the document may be in some way relevant, though the relevance is not clear at the time when the Government servant makes the request, the request should not be rejected. The power to deny access on the grounds of public interest or security of State should be exercised only when there are reasonable and sufficient grounds to believe that public interest or security of the State will clearly suffer. Such occasions should be rare.
203. Generally what are the documents which are not made available by the Head of the Department?
Para 3.6 of the Vigilance Manual (1991 Ed) indicates the following as examples of documents, access to which may reasonably be denied:
i) Reports of a departmental officer appointed to hold a preliminary enquiry or the report of the preliminary investigation of SPE. These reports are intended only for the disciplinary authority to satisfy himself whether departmental action should be taken against the Government servant or not and are treated as confidential documents. These reports are not presented before the Inquiry Officer and no reference to them is made in the statement of allegations. If the accused officer makes a request for the production/inspection of the report of the Investigating Officer, S.P.E., the Inquiring Authority should, instead of dealing with it himself, pass on the same to the Disciplinary Authority concerned, who may claim privilege of the same in public interest, as envisaged in proviso to sub-rule (13) of Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
ii) File dealing with the disciplinary case against the Government servant - The preliminary enquiry report and the further stages in the disciplinary action against the Government are processed on this file. Such files are treated as confidential and access to them should be denied.
iii) Advice of the Central Vigilance Commission. - The advice tendered by the Central Vigilance Commission is of a confidential nature meant to assist the disciplinary authority and should not be shown to the Government servant.
iv) Character roll of the officer. - The CR of the official should not be shown to him.
The above provision has to be perceived in the context of the Right to Information Act and subsequent judicial pronouncements. As is well known, it is mandatory to provide the advice of the CVC. Besides, the employees have acquired right to peruse their Annual Performance Appraisal Reports
Post a Comment