An officer presiding over a group of parties with conflicting or mutually opposed objectives has to assume two qualities:
be fair, and
be firm and impartial
The needs of objectivity, of analytically and dispassionately looking towards the core issues, to be brought out in an inquiry,- in other words, the truth or otherwise of each imputation of the charge sheet, demand an alert and disciplined approach on the part of the inquiry officer. This page analyses the role of the inquiry officer from this stand point or view. It defines and deals with the mission and objectives that should permeate the mindset of an inquiry officer, the disciplining of his "attitude" as the presiding officer, and his own special interest to be fulfilled, intended to faithfully and impartially discharge the functions of his statutory assignment. The knowledge and skill resources need to be acquired/possessed by him, the pitfalls that inadvertence may lead him to derail or bring disrepute to his assignment are all described in detail.
Specific circumstances, when an officer appointed as inquiry officer for a departmental inquiry, should politely decline the assignment, on moral/ethical grounds are narrated, as also how to deal with or overcome particular problems that an IO may face, when asked to conduct an inquiry on a defective or materially deficient charge sheet, or when he finds that either the PO or CO are incompetent and not in a position to lead their role/assignments properly, all contingencies threatening to bring down the quality of the inquiry process to nullity.
The page ends after describing in a nutshell the sequential stages of his linear functions, from start to end.
His Mission & Objectives
The acceptance of a mission and setting up pre-defined objectives helps to provide a roadmap to the inquiry officer to effectively discharge his duties. His mission and objectives should be as under:
IO as an administrative officer, but called upon to perform a function with a perceptible judicial spirit. He is therefore a quasi-judicial authority.
As the DA Regulations are statutory in character, the IO appointed under the provisions of the said regulations to carry out assigned functions is a statutory authority. His loyalty is therefore to the provisions of the statute and his powers and responsibilities are defined by the statute, in terms of which he is appointed.
job - "Find the truth of the articles of charges and imputation of misconduct". Truth is his goal and as stated earlier the inquiry officer's primary loyalty is to the statutory DA Regulations and not even to the disciplinary authority, who after making the appointment cannot interfere in the inquiry process. The disciplinary authority can however change the inquiry officer in the midst of an inquiry for reasons as decided by him or send advice to the inquiry officer to conclude the proceedings expeditiously.
Hear both sides. Do not hear outsiders. Start with an open mind holding only the issues posed by the charge sheet at commencement and absorb objectively the evidence presented during inquiry by either side.
Do not bring personal interest (likes or dislikes; compassion or hatred) into play with reference to your role.
Do not lend your mind to anything external to the inquiry records, while drawing your conclusions. Do not let your mind be known to anyone before submitting your report
Do not allow any one not even your administrative head to discuss matters pertaining to the disciplinary case with you during inquiry, except as witness attending the inquiry while recording evidence.
Keep both sides PO & CO at equal distance.
Bring out impartial logic while drafting your report in simple words, and lend no other consideration.
Be bold and fair in drafting the report as per your convictions.
His Attitude
As the next step, the IO should accept a balanced attitude to remain steadfast to his mission, to the realisation of his objectives and to properly discharge his duties. In short he must follow the guidelines as under:
Be objective, fair and impartial. No predetermined bias or conclusions about the case.
Even if you sense the charged officer has committed serious omissions, do not bring this feeling into play, while conducting the inquiry. However if the bare facts establishing prima facie a misconduct by the charged officer are proved, the charge is presumed as established. However it is your duty to bring these facts to the notice of the charged officer and seek his explanation or give him an opportunity to explain his stand. The charges are deemed as proved only if the charged officer fails to provide satisfactory explanation properly justifying his action.
Do not consider that the Inquiry consists merely of two sides, prosecution and defence. Consider that it consists of three elements, i.e. the prosecution, the allegations, and the charged officer. Both sides have to deal with the allegations - one trying to prove it and the other endeavoring to disprove and explain it. This is the substance of the inquiry, at the end of which IO has to find out who holds the truth, the PO or CO.
Qualification and knowledge Resources to be
possessed by the Inquiry Officer
As per CVC Manual the officer selected for appointment as Inquiry Officer should be of sufficiently senior in rank and one who is not having any prejudice or bias against the accused officer and who did not have an occasion to express an opinion on the merits of the case at an earlier stage.
Additionally he must have good knowledge of the DA Regulations of the Bank, as well as the CVC Manual. Rudimentary knowledge of Indian evidences Act with reference to examination and cross-examination of witnesses is an added qualification. A ready reference manual covering guidelines issued by the Government of India in respect of difference provisions of CCS (CCA) Rules, 1964 will be useful.
Where the allegations in the charge sheet cover transactions involving complex technical particulars, the Inquiry Officer will need that the first prosecution witness is an expert on such technical matters, who explains these technical details and these are recorded as evidence in the inquiry.
His Special Interest
Ensure inquiry is completed expeditiously adhering to the time schedule.
Ensure inquiry is conducted within the provisions of the DA Regulations and strictly conforming to its quasi-judicial standards.(Refer all about quasi-judicial nature of inquiry proceedings from the chapter on departmental inquiry).
Ensure the charged officer is not denied natural justice. Learn all about principles of natural justice, as enunciated by the judicial authorities and reasonable opportunity as provided under Article 311 of the Constitution, from the relevant chapters.
Reduce to writing i.e. include in the records of proceeding all procedural, technical objections raised in the inquiry and also mention therein clearly your ruling.
In the first instance conduct the inquiry objectively. But not less in importance is the necessity that the records of the inquiry should reflect clearly this fact. Be perfect and be seen as perfect by those concerned.
Pitfalls that He must Avoid
If the disciplinary authority, disagrees with his findings on logical grounds and records substituted findings on such imputation, it is a reflection on the IO's balanced judgement and indirectly a stricture on his judicious approach. On the other hand, if the disciplinary authority remits the case for a fresh inquiry for valid reasons recorded by it, it is a reflection on the quality & objectiveness of the overall inquiry proceedings. The inquiry conducted is rated as sub-standard. He should take precautions that these eventualities do not occur on account of avoidable omissions on his part.
If however the charged officer approaches a court of law, prefers a judicial review of the proceedings and is able to set aside the punishment, it is a reflection on both the IO and the Disciplinary Authority. This is another extreme. This may reflect disrepute for the entire discipline management system of the organization.
IO should weigh these eventualities and keep the findings of his report well within bounds by means of an impartial assessment of the evidence and based on equity and justice. He should not give opportunity to either the disciplinary authority or the charged officer to question his objectivity and thoroughness or impartiality.
When the Inquiry Officer should Politely Decline the Assignment,
When Appointed by the Disciplinary Authority
He should politely decline the assignment stating valid reasons, when he feels that he is not competent or will not be able to deliver justice to the job. Some such circumstances are as under:
- Charged officer happens to be senior in status/rank to him.
Though CO is junior, IO-designate happens to be the immediate administrative head of the charged officer, with assigned role to act as his nurturing parent.
When he is partly connected as controller or in any other capacity with the transaction(s) included in the charge sheet.
When he happens to be a material witness for the defence or prosecution, though not cited as such.
When he has earlier conducted an inquiry against the same charged officer.
Defects, Deficiencies or Errors found in the Statement
of Imputations or Articles of Charge
It is the duty of the presenting officer to get these rectified after taking up the matter with the Disciplinary Authority. IO will not directly concern himself. IO will conduct the inquiry, hear the evidences on both sides and if needed would invoke his special powers under DA Regulation 6(21) Explanation given under sub item (i) (d). At best immediately after appointment, IO may informally discuss the matter with the PO and advise him to get the matter taken up with the disciplinary authority for effecting necessary corrections to remove the defects in the imputations.
If PO or CO Fails to Present their Respective Cases Properly
Such deficiency may be due to-
-
capacity to effectively cross examine witnesses of the opposite side.
Lack of capacity to draft the PO's/Defence brief properly.
The inquiry is intended for establishing the truth. Generally it is not advisable to punish a charged officer due to his inability to defend himself, if otherwise he is found innocent. Similarly it is not prudent to let a charged officer escape because of lack of capacity of the PO. However the inquiry officer should not and cannot step into the shoes and assume the roles either of the PO or CO. This is against the spirit of objectivity attached to his role. He may however use his own powers under the DA regulations to bridge the problem.
If the brief of the PO or defence is inept, the brief being only a summary of the evidences presented, the Inquiry officer can directly interpret the evidences and arrive at his independent but logical conclusion.
If either party is lacking capacity to effectively cross-examine witness, or fails to produce material documents/witness, the Inquiry officer can invoke his powers under DA Regulation 6(14) and save the situation. By way of example the charged officer denies a particular allegation that he was not present on the day it occurred at the Branch and was on leave, but fails to submit any corroborating evidence in support due to his ignorance, the Inquiry Officer on his own discretion can call for an extract of the attendance register and the leave extract of the charged officer to check this fact. He does this using his powers under DA regulation 6(14). He does this because he is interested in knowing the correct facts/truth and not because he is soft to the charged officer and eager to shield him.
Similarly if either party fails to produce all the material evidences (documents and oral evidence) the Inquiry Officer may directly call for such documents and witnesses, that he may feel is relevant or necessary.[also DA regulation 6(14)]
Sequential Stages/Steps in the Role of the Inquiry Officer
Framing of Issues on Receipt of order of Appointment :
He accepts a mission and sets his mindset for a role of reporting the truth, and fair play in the ensuing process. He can at this stage study the charge sheet and the written statement of reply to the charge sheet submitted by the charged officer to the disciplinary authority, to visualise and define the core "Issues" that have to be decided during the Inquiry. Obviously the "Issues" are different from the imputations. The imputations include "facts-in-issue and several relevant facts, explaining the facts-in-issue (allegations). All the relevant facts may not be disputed by the charged officer. The "Issues" to be decided in the course of the inquiry will therefore consist of those statements in the charge sheet that have been disputed by the charged officer either through denial or explanation. The defining and ascertaining of the "Issues" in dispute will be a decisive step and enables the inquiry officer to subsequently assess the relevancy of the defence list of documents and witnesses for approval, and also to monitor that evidences testified by witnesses on both sides during regular inquiry are made within the bounds of the "Issues" disputed the charge sheet and that proceedings do not stray outside to external matters. The guidelines for this stage have already been given earlier in this page.
Providing facilities to the charged officer at the Preliminary Inquiry:
He is sympathetic for the genuine needs of material information of the charged officer to effectively present his defence and accommodates him to an optimum extent. The PO is already done his homework and is ready for the offence. Allow the CO due opportunities for collecting necessary material for an effective defence, and consider all such requests of the CO with an open mind. The complete process of this stage is detailed in the next Page
Getting & Assessing the Evidence at the Regular Inquiry:
He is the course director and moderator. He ensures smooth flow of inquiry processes and reconciles conflicts on the spot. He is a keen observer. He is also a good history writer, as he records every material detail of the proceedings in the daily order sheet.
He minutely follows the sequences of the unfolding evidence by the respective sides and take notings of significant facts/information relevant to the "Issues". In pursuance of this objective
He must study the documents filed by the presenting officer and later by the charged officer at the earliest available gap of time and note the significant data/information contained therein.
Likewise he will also be closely and attentively following the examination, cross-examination and re-examination of each witnesses towards the same objective.
Such simultaneous observation/study will enable the inquiry officer to clear gaps or apparent irrelevancy in emerging evidence by way of putting supplementary questioning by him to the witnesses, to recall earlier witnesses when necessary and to call for additional records (documentary evidence).
Accordingly if he observes gaps or apparent discrepancies in the evidence presented, he takes the initiative and recalls any witness or calls for additional witness to question them and to get the clear picture. He can also call additional records. To make the disciplinary case complete, he also questions the charged officer on any point or points appearing against him, for his clarification. In short the DA regulations contain provisions to enable the inquiry officer to be pro-active and perceptive during the inquiry proceedings, instead of merely being receptive and reactive to the sequence of what is presented.
Assessing/Analysing the Evidence in total & Arriving at final Conclusions After completion of the Inquiry for Submitting the Report of the inquiry Officer - :
He acts as a reliable adjudicator. He looks to the evidence presented from either side on each imputation and draws a logical conclusion, if it is proved or not. He draws his report and submits the same to the Disciplinary Authority. The complete process is detailed in the last page (Page" 4) His job now ends. He cannot retrace or revise his own report once it is submitted to the Disciplinary Authority.
