(suspended)disciplinary proceedings--io retd & re_employed

totally confusing descripttion.  I decide not to respond rather than giving incorrect views.

sorry sir....actually i am also confused after going thro" the paper submitted by one Charged Officer of a PSU   :The matter is >>> a govt official was assigned to conduct a DP as an IO by his designation(say Dy.Secretary_finance) and formal appointment order was issued by the Disciplinary Authority as per law,started the DP,suspended the same for an indefinite period(say,18 months back).....in the meantime IO retd from service....later on joined another concern as an Advisor.....and now issued notice for continuation of the same DP using the letter head of the new concern with designation as ADVISOR....there is no formal communication or appointment letter of IO from the Disciplinary Authority infavour of "ADVISOR"....CO requested for the same but it is turned down and the "advisor" is going to start the "suspended DP".My quarries is whether new appointment order in favour of ADVISOR as an IO is necessary or not when earlier appointment order mentioned the designation as deputy secretary( who retd a long back)? plz advise. regards

facts narrated by you  are analysed as under

a govt official was assigned to conduct a DP as an IO by his designation(say Dy.Secretary_finance)

illegal ab-initio. IO/PO are appointed by name. IO carries this tag unless the order is revoked or he submits his report.

formal appointment order was issued by the Disciplinary Authority as per law,started the DP,

Incorrect impression .  The DP is started with the issued of chargesheet and appointment  of IO is subsequent development.

suspended the same for an indefinite period(say,18 months back)

Incorrect or you are not able to present facts correctly. 

The suspension (though ordered rill further order) is supposed to be reviewed after 90 days failing which it is deemed to have lapsed.

You have not stated anything about review of suspension.

.....in the meantime IO retd from service....later on joined another concern as an Advisor.....and now issued notice for continuation of the same DP using the letter head of the new concern with designation as ADVISOR

Nothing wrong. 

You never said that his appointment is revoked.  It is immaterial which post he now holds or does not hold he is IO (if otherwise lawfully appointed) whose order has not been revoked.  There is no ban on retired officer to be IO.

 ....there is no formal communication or appointment letter of IO from the Disciplinary Authority infavour of "ADVISOR"

There need not be any formal communication. 

....CO requested for the same but it is turned down and the "advisor" is going to start the "suspended DP".

You are vague.  To whom the request (though irrelevant) was made and who turned down the same.

My quarries is whether new appointment order in favour of ADVISOR as an IO is necessary or not when earlier appointment order mentioned the designation as deputy secretary( who retd a long back)?

No order of continuation is  necessary.  

But in your case you are repeatedly telling that the order was by designation.  If that so   the notwithstanding above, the appointment is void ab-initio and remaining points raised by you are irrelevant.

is this the same case which was discussed at

www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/disciplinary-proceedings-after-5yrs-317986.asp#.UpAYYCfQzmk

It may be in your own interest to put all facts in one thread.  You are having multiple queries:-

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/disciplinary-proceedings-after-5yrs-317986.asp#.UpAYYCfQzmk

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/preliminary-enquiry-started-in-a-psu-after-5yrs-removing-the-biased-io-and-po-also-but-non-disburse-338736.asp#.UpAZdSfQzmk

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/employer-employee-relationship-340201.asp#.UpAZpSfQzmk

https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/experts/tender-floated-violating-govt-norms-340996.asp

This is against your interest as by half facts you will give half advised which may be incorrect if seen in total perspective.

DO NOT BE YOUR OWN DAMAGER

FURTHER it  is found that no mandatory review ofsuspention was made by the disp. authoriy during that 18 months(of suspended enquiry) as the CO did not get any copy of the review.....how we will proceed.?