TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -259
1015. Burden of Proof
The general principle is that the burden of proof in departmental proceedings is on the employer to justify dismissal or other penal action. In Sulhendra Chandra v. Inion Territory, AIR 1962 Tripura 15, it was observed :
“Enquiring Officers must understand that a charge has to be proved against a delinquent and it is not for the delinquent to absolve himself from the charge" and again, “the burden was on the prosecution to bring home the charge against the petitioner. But the burden appears to have been thrown on the petitioner to exonerate himself.”
In Radhakanta v. State, AIR 1962 Orissa 125, the Court observed – “...a tribunal is wrong if it places the burden of establishing his innocence on the public servant..." In S. R. Biswas v. State, AIR 1964 Cal. 415, it was held that the onus was on the department to prove that the assets of the employee concerned were not in proportion to his emoluments.
1016. REPORT OF INQUIRY
At the close of oral inquiry, the inquiring authority has to consider entire record of the case, assess the value of each piece of evidence adduced during the inquiry and record its findings in the form of a report, to be submitted to the disciplinary authority. The report must be submitted in writing, duly signed by the inquiring authority.
Post a Comment