Ccs inquiry change of io and po under ccs rule 14 inquiry
Tomin Saji
(Querist) 01 October 2018
This query is : Resolved
Hello all
I am seeking clarification regarding can the Disiplinary Authority change the IO and PO together after wrtitten statement of defense/written Briefs was taken from the charged officer and Presenting officer. The Inquiry according to CCS INquiry procedure for the CO and PO are over as they submit the written Briefs. This was done on July 1 2017 when the CO submitted the written brief. After this for 8 months til February 2018 there was no news from the IO or the Disciplinary aiuthority. Then suddently CO receives a leter from DA saying IPO and PO has been changed after 8 months of inactivity and saying that the hearing will proceeed from the first step of inquiry, inspection of documents . It is to be rememberred here the written statement of defense/ written briefs during the Inquiry were already taken from CO and he also made a oral defense.
Al the defense points of CO are with IO and DA. Is it legal to start a new inquiry with new IO and CO. The reason given for appointing the new IO and PO are that the previous IO is busy and has no time.
already 1 year ad 5 months are over including 8 months of inactivity after submitting written briefs. Is there any precedents or judgments that stop this kind of behavior from DA. Can they proceed from beginning again after taking the COs defense.
In addition to this the charge sheet also contains false allegations. so the DA is protracting the inquiry because it cannot be proved.
Please advice. Emergency,. Urgent
Tomin
Guest
(Expert) 01 October 2018
What is your cadre and to which department do you belong?
Tomin Saji
(Querist) 01 October 2018
Class A and i am working in an Autonomous Research Institute funded by Govt of India where CCS rules have been adopted.
P. Venu
(Expert) 01 October 2018
The action of the Disciplinary Authority is irregular, if not illegal. The real reason could be that the proceedings and report, if any, submitted by the previous have been rendered non est because of the recently notified sub-rule (23) under Rule 14:
"(24) (a) The Inquiring Authority should conclude the inquiry and submit his report within a period of six months from the date of receipt of order of his appointment as Inquiring Authority.
(b)Where it is not possible to adhere to the time limit specified in clause (a), the Inquiring Authority may record the reasons and seek extension of time from the disciplinary authority in writing, who may allow an additional time not exceeding six months for completion of the Inquiry, at a time.
(c)The extension for a period not exceeding six months at a time may be allowed for any good and sufficient reasons to be recorded in writing by the Disciplinary Authority or any other Authority authorised by the Disciplinary Authority on his behalf.
Tomin Saji
(Querist) 01 October 2018
No sir that is not the case report was not submitted. this is what they are saying. Even then after taking written briefs can they start inquiry from step 1 because the CO defense is already exposed.
Guest
(Expert) 01 October 2018
Get the order of the disciplinary authority quashed. The inquiry stands completed after submission of briefs by the PO & the delinquent. There is neither any logic nor any rule for change of I.O. after completion of inquiry.
Dr J C Vashista
(Expert) 02 October 2018
Well advised by experts, I fully agree.
Action of the disciplinary authority is illegal, get it quashed.
