TIT BITS ON DISCIPLINE -263
Value of the Report of Inquiry
1028. The Supreme Court has held that - "neither the conclusion of evidence nor the punishment which the enquiring authority may regard as appropriate is binding on the punishing authority" [A.N.D'silva v. Union of India, AIR 1962 SC 1130]. The disciplinary authority has, therefore, to apply its mind and take an independent view of the matter. But, though the findings recorded by the inquiring authority are not final and binding, the disciplinary authority cannot completely disregard them because the Enquiry officer is not an amanuensis regarding the deposition of witnesses. He is entitled to give his findings and the punishing authority is bound to take a note of them (see I. M. Lall case, AIR 1945 FC 47 and AIR 1948 PC 121]. Thus, the disciplinary authority cannot completely disregard the findings of the inquiry officer. He may differ but he has to record its reasons which are to be communicated to the charged officer and are open to attack by him.
CONSIDERING REPORT OF INQUIRY
1029. When the first stage of inquiry, i.e., recording of all evidence is over and the inquiry officer has submitted his report, the second stage of inquiry, viz., considering the report of inquiry and taking final decision thereon, in accordance with law begins. The Supreme Court has held that both the stages of departmental proceedings are judicial in nature. It is erroneous to say that while the first step of inquiry is a judicial process, the second stage of considering the report of inquiry and imposing the punishment is of administrative nature [Bachitter Singh v. State of Punjab, AIR 1963 SC 395]. Both the stages are, therefore, of equal importance
Post a Comment