TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -254
1001. Past record of the employee not to be considered
The inquiry officer has no jurisdiction to consider and take into account past bad record of the employee except where it is mentioned in the articles of charge and the employee is given a reasonable opportunity to explain it (State of Mysore v. K Manche Gowda, AIR 1964 SC 506]. However, where a witness during his deposition made a passing reference to a previous incident and the charged employed had sufficient opportunity to get it clarified in cross-examination, it was held that the inquiry was not vitiated (Sanwar Mal v. Union of India, (1986)1 ATR 291].
1002. Inquiry officer is duty bound to record clearly and precisely his conclusions and reasons therefor
"It may be that the enquiry officer need not write a very long or elaborate report; but since his findings are likely to lead to the dismissal of the employee, it is his duty to record clearly and precisely his conclusions and to indicate briefly his reasons for reaching the said conclusions." [Khardah & Co. Ltd. v. Its Workmen, AIR 1964 SC 719]
1003. The report of inquiry must contain reasons for the findings
The report of inquiry must contain reasons for the findings. If this is not done, the report will neither be of much use to the disciplinary authority who has to consider it in order to arrive at its decisions, nor to the employee concerned who has to be supplied with a copy thereof The report should include findings on each charge with reasons there for. The mental process must not be silent (AL Kalrav: P& E Corpn. Ltd., AIR 1984 SC 1361]. In Anil Kumar v. Presiding Officer, AIR 1985 SC 1121, the Supreme Court observed :
“An enquiry report in a quasi-judicial enquiry must show the reasons for the conclusions. It cannot be an ipse dixit of the inquiry officer. It has to be a speaking order in the sense that the conclusion is supported by the reasons. This is too well- settled to be supported by a precedent."
And again,
“Where a disciplinary enquiry affects the livelihood and is likely to cast a stigma and it has to be held in accordance with the principles of natural justice, the minimum expectation is that the report must be a reasoned one."
In this case, the inquiry officer merely mentioned the stages through which the inquiry passed, there was no application of mind and the inquiry officer did not deal with the various points of defence raised during inquiry. The order of termination based on such a report was quashed.
The recording of reasons is thus a mandatory requirement. Though nature and elaboration of reasons must necessarily depend on the facts of each case, the report must do justice with factual issues involved.
Post a Comment