Rule 14 inquiry - delay and non pocession/production of original documents in inquiry
Harikumar
(Querist) 25 July 2013
This query is : Resolved
I am a Central Govt employee from Kerala. Due to an alleged involvement in a criminal case (malpractices in a departmental exam)at New Delhi in 1996, I was placed under suspension on 08.05.1998 as a criminal case was filed against me in the court at New Delhi and continued under suspension for a long period of 4 years and 2 months.
There after a Rule 14 Inquiry was ordered on 31.8.99. The inquiry was dragged on for over 13 years with no fault on my part and finally the inquiry report was issued on 04.10.2012.
Original file was not with the disciplinary authority at the time of framing the charges and that was not placed before the Inquiry Officer also, as these documents were in the custody of Police. All the documents produced were photocopies. Hence the inquiry, perhaps, was conducted in violation of statutory provisions contained in Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965.
List of documents shown in the Memo of charge itself is written as
“ List of Documents (Photocopies) “ and the list of documents shown in the I.O Report also clearly shows all the documents filed on behalf of D.A. are mere photocopies.
The Inquiring Authority has mentioned in his report that the defense has not demanded production of original documents in the Inquiry when the same was mentioned in defence brief. Is it not the duty of the prosecution to produce the original documents in the Inquiry? Is there need of a demand from the defense ?
The Disciplinary Authority has forwarded a copy of the inquiry report, simultaneously informing me that he has agreed with the findings of the Inquiring Authority before receipt of my representation. I have submitted my representation citing all the above matters. But, the D.A. has issued a major penalty of reduction of Pay by two stages for 3 years and I will not earn increments during the period of 3 years and this will be with cumulative effect.
In a similar case of Sri A. M. Srinivasan Vs. Union of India in O.A.180/2011, the Hon’ble C.A.T Madras Bench has quashed the memo of charges and punishment order vide its order dated 14 June 2012, on the grounds of delay and non-production of original documents in the inquiry.
Kindly Advice as this case has ruined me completely.
Guest
(Expert) 25 July 2013
You have given mere description of your case, but what actually is your query? On what point you want advice of experts.
Harikumar
(Querist) 25 July 2013
Respected Sir,
My quesry is the following :-
I have submitted appeal to A.A in 10.12.2012 and a reminder on 06.05.2013 along with copy of Chennai CAT Judgement dtd 14.06.2012. No reply received till date. My concern is that whether this entire proceedings is valid without original documents (Only photocopies are available with D.A and I.A)at the time of issue of charge sheet and during the Inquiry. Is there a lapse in the proceedings and whether this whole Rule 14 case can be quashed or not in the light of CAT, Chennai Judgement dtd 14.06.2012. The Suspension period is not regularised, no promotions (the then TBOP, MACP-I, II are still pending). I will be forwarding a scanned copy of the CAT Judgement today itselg in your email.
Regards sir,
Harikumar
R.K Nanda
(Expert) 25 July 2013
consult local lawyer.
Harikumar
(Querist) 25 July 2013
Respected Sir,
It is told that I can approch CAT, but, CAT will ony direct the A.A to dispose the Appeal time bounded. Normally A.A will uphold the order of D.A. Local Lawyer has advised to wait. Alleged incident was in 1996. Court proceeding is pending at New Delhi even after 63 court dates. Not a single witness has been examined till date. I have been attending the court on all dates from Kerala. Hope you could imagine my sufferings of last 17 years.
Guest
(Expert) 25 July 2013
Dear Hari Kumar,
So far as the Appellate Authority is concerned, he cannot be bound by the citation of judgment in any other's case as a precedent to be followed in your case. Only a competent court can decide the matter based on any other judgment provided there are similarities in the cases.
However, the decision of the appellate authority should also not wait for the decision in the pending court case, as the court case is governed by the relevant laws, while the departmental proceedings are governed by the rules and procedure set to be observed by the administration/ management and the employees.
The local advocate has advised you correctly, as the CAT cannot interfere in between the process of the disciplinary proceedings, except to order the concerned authority to expedite the case. You may, if you like, approach CAT to get orders for the A.A. to expedite case. But, beware, once Court/ CAT's pressure is felt by any authority, biases do take place in the minds of the concerned authorities, which can adversely affect a case resulting in to time taking litigations in the CAT/HC/SC, which can lead to maximum of delay in getting justice.
So, better take appointment from the A.A. for personal hearing in the case to present your point before him and to request him for early decision on his part.
About your objection on non-availability/ production of original documents, if you have participated in the inquiry proceedings without raising any objection at the time of inspection of listed documents and insistence for production of the original documents, you have virtually lost the opportunity on that count, as the opportune time was only at the stage of inspection of documents and get the discrepancy recorded in the Daily Order Sheet of the I.O. That point may probably not help you much at this juncture in deciding your appeal.
Harikumar
(Querist) 25 July 2013
Respected Sir,
Thanks a lot for sparing time to give me a long detailed reply.
Regarding non production of original documents, I was asked by the then I.O. on 27.07.2000 to confirm in writing whether I accepts authenticity of the documents inspected by 17.08.200 with reasons for non acceptance. I have given a reply on 14.08.2000 stating that authenticity of the documents shown to me on 27.07.2000 can't be accepted at that stage as most of the documents were photocopies. During the Inquiry the matter of photocopies was raised, but my defense assistant not insisted for original documents. It is clearly mentioned in I.O. Report that out of the 26 documents filed on behalf of the D.A, 24 were photocopies. This was highlighted in the defense brief and representation to D.A but not yielded consideration.
Kindly advise.
regards,
Harikumar
Guest
(Expert) 25 July 2013
If that is true, your plea can be accepted in a court case, but you should not hope for any credit to that effect from A.A.
