Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

17. From a plain reading of Clause (iv) of Rule 7 of 1999 Rules it is clear that the charged Government servant shall be required to put in a written statement of his defence in person within a period specified in the charge sheet which shall be not less than 15 days from the date of issue of charge sheet. In such a written statement or reply of charge sheet the delinquent employee has to state as to whether he desires to cross examine any witness mentioned in the charge sheet and as to whether he desires to produce evidence in his defence. The delinquent employee shall also be informed that in case he does not appear or file written statement/reply on the specified date it will be presumed that he has none to furnish and Inquiry Officer shall proceed to complete the inquiry exparte. Clause (x) of the aforesaid Rules provides that where a charged Government servant failed to appear on the date fixed in the enquiry or at any stage of proceeding inspite of service of notice on him or having knowledge of the date the Inquiry Officer shall proceed with the enquiry exparte. In such a case the Inquiry Officer shall record the statement of witnesses mentioned in the charge sheet in the absence of Government servant.
18. Thus from the aforesaid provisions it is clear that Inquiry Officer can hold the enquiry exparte in two situations. Firstly inspite of service of charge sheet the delinquent employee does not reply the charge sheet within time stipulated in the charge sheet which shall not be less than 15 days from the date of issue of charge sheet and in such situation it shall be presumed that delinquent employee has nothing to say in respect of the charges levelled against him and Inquiry Officer shall proceed to complete the enquiry exparte and secondly where the charged Government servant does not appear on the date fixed in the enquiry or at any stage of proceeding inspite of service of notice on him or having knowledge of the date the Inquiry Officer shall proceed with the enquiry exparte. In such situation the Inquiry Officer shall record the statements of witnesses mentioned in the charge-sheet in the absence of charged Government servant The aforesaid provisions clearly indicate that even if the charge sheet has not been replied by the delinquent employee or the delinquent employee does not appear in the inquiry proceedings despite notice of the date fixed for such inquiry, the Inquiry Officer can proceed to hold only exparte enquiry even in the absence of delinquent employee on the basis of documentary and oral evidence mentioned in the charge sheet but he cannot escape from holding such exparte enquiry even in the absence of delinquent employee and straight-way submit an inquiry report holding the delinquent employee guilty of the charges without holding such ex-parte inquiry meaning thereby the Inquiry Officer cannot submit inquiry report straight-way holding the charged employee guilty of the charges levelled in the charge-sheet either without holding formal full fledged inquiry or without holding exparte inquiry in the manner indicated herein before.

18-A. Thus refusal to reply the charge-sheet by the charged government servant despite service of charge-sheet upon him/her no doubt permits the inquiry officer to presume that the delinquent employee has nothing to say about it but it does not permit to presume that the delinquent employee has admitted the charges levelled in the charge-sheet. Similarly failure or refusal to participate in inquiry despite notice or knowledge of date fixed for such inquiry also does not permit the inquiry officer to raise any presumption of admission of guilt by delinquent employee rather the inquiry officer is required to hold ex-parte inquiry from the aforesaid stage because of the simple reason that in both the situations relevant rules do not admit any ambiguity and clearly indicates the necessary consequence flowing there from for holding ex-parte inquiry. It is only in a situation contemplated under Clause (vi) of Rule 7 of the Rules alone the inquiry officer can straight-way submit a report to Disciplinary Authority without holding any formal inquiry, where the charges are admitted by charged government servant and in no other situation. The ex-parte inquiry should not be confused and equated with no formal inquiry accordingly would not permit the Inquiry Officer to submit inquiry report finding the charged employee guilty of the charges levelled against him without holding any such formal disciplinary inquiry. Therefore a distinction has to be always borne in mind in the aforesaid two categories of cases, i.e. (i) based on admission and (ii) situations warranting an exparte inquiry. The aforesaid principle shall also apply with necessary modifications where the inquiry is held by Disciplinary Authority.

19. Under the Old Rules of 1930, also similar provisions were made without heavily wording the same, wherein Inquiry Officer was liable to hold formal inquiry in respect of the charges not admitted by the delinquent Government servant of the charges levelled in the charge-sheet. The requirement of the applicability of Rules 55(i) of the rules was excluded in cases of an order based on facts which has led to the conviction of delinquent employee in a criminal court or by court martial, and to the extent indicated in Clause (4) of Rule 55 of 1930 Rules only in the situations visualized there under in the manner indicated therein and no other situation therefore under old rule also the exparte inquiry could be held in the situations warranting for holding such ex-parte inquiry.