MCQ No.1 of PO Guide I

 TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -261
REPORT OF INQUIRY

1020. The inquiry officer has no jurisdiction to consider and take into account the 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].

1021. 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 therefor. The mental process must not be silent [A.L. Kalra v. P& E Corpn. Ltd., AIR 1984 SC 1361]. In Anil Kumar v. Presiding Officer, AIR 1985 SC 1121, the Supreme Court observed :
“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”

Thus, the recording of reasons is 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.

1022. The Supreme Court has held that unless the statutory rule or the specific order under which he was appointed requires, the inquiry officer need not make any recommendation regarding the punishment which may be imposed on the charged employee. However, if he makes any such recommendation, like his other findings, it shall be intended merely to supply material for consideration of the disciplinary authority (Union of India v. H.C. Goel, AIR 1964 SC 364; A.N.D'Silva v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 1130]. In fact, some authorities hold that the inquiry officer is only a fact finding authority and has no jurisdiction even to dub any particular action of the employee as a misconduct. It is entirely for the disciplinary authority to decide the question of guilt or innocence and the punishment, if guilty.

1023. Where the rules so authorise, the inquiring authority may record its findings on a charge different from the original articles of charge but it cannot record such findings unless either they are based on a clear admission by the charged officer or he was specifically granted an opportunity to meet such a charge during inquiry ['Explanation' below rule 14(23)(1), CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965). It goes without saying that such different/additional charge must be incidental to the main charge. The inquiring authority has no power to record findings on a fresh or new charge which should appropriately be subject matter of another charge sheet.

1024. If a dispute arises as to what happened before the Inquiry Tribunal , the statement of the presiding officer in that regard is generally taken as correct [Union of India v. T.R. Varma, AIR 1957 SC 882].