Assistance to the charged Government servant in the
presentation of his case (Paragraph 25)

1. In the copy of the order appointing the Presenting Officer, endorsed to the Government servant concerned, he should be asked to finalise the selection of his Defence Assistance before the commencement of the proceedings. The Government servant may avail himself of the assistance of any other Government servant, as defined in rule 2 (h) of the CCS(CCA) Rules, posted in any office either at this headquarters or at the place where inquiry is held. The Government servant may take the assistance of any other Government servant posted at any other station if the inquiring authority having regard to the circumstances of the case and for reasons to be recorded in writing so permits.

2. If the Presenting Officer appointed by the disciplinary authority is a legal practitioner, the Government servant will be so informed by the disciplinary authority as soon as the Presenting Officer has been appointed so that the Government servant may, if he so desires, engage a legal practitioner to present the case on his behalf before the Inquiry Officer. The Government servant may not otherwise engage a legal practitioner unless the disciplinary authority, having regard to the circumstances of a case, so permits. If for example, the facts and the mass of evidence are very complicated and a layman will be at sea to understand the implications thereof and prepare a proper defence, the facility of a lawyer should be allowed as part of the reasonable opportunity.

3. When on behalf of the disciplinary authority, the case is being presented by a Prosecuting Officer of the Central Bureau of Investigation or by a Government Law Officer (such as Legal Adviser, Junior Legal Adviser), there are evidently good and sufficient circumstances for the disciplinary authority to exercise his discretion in favour of the delinquent officer and allow him to be represented by a legal practitioner. Any exercise of discretion to the contrary in such cases is likely to be held by the court as arbitrary and prejudicial to the defence of the delinquent Government servant.

4. No permission is needed by the charged Government servant to secure the assistance of any other Government servant. The latter also is not required to take permission for assisting the accused Government servant. It will, however, be necessary for him to obtain the permission of his controlling authority to absent himself from office in order to assist the charged Government servant during the inquiry.

5. Government servants involved in disciplinary proceedings may also take the assistance of retired Government servants subject to the following conditions:-

   1. the retired Government servant concerned should have retired from service under the Central Government;

   2. if the retired Government servant is also a legal practitioner, the restrictions on engaging a legal practitioner by a delinquent Government servant to present the case on his behalf, contained in Rule 14(8) of the C.C.S. (CCA) Rules, 1965 and paras 25.2. and 25.3 would apply;

   3. P ALIGN="justify">(the retired Government servant concerned should not have, in any manner, been associated with the case at investigation stage or otherwise in his official capacity.

   4. For payment of travelling and other expenses, the retied Government servant will be deemed to belong to the Grade of Government servants to which he belonged immediately before his retirement. The expenditure on this account will be borne by the Department or office to which the delinquent Government servant belongs.

1. As soon as the order of appointment of the Inquiry Officer is issued, the disciplinary authority will forward to him the following papers along with that order :-

   1. A copy of the articles of charge and the statement of imputations of misconduct or misbehavior;

   2. A copy of the written statement of defence submitted by the Government servant. If the charged Government servant has not submitted a written statement of defence, this fact should be clearly brought to the notice of the Inquiring Authority;

   3. List of witnesses by whom the articles of charge are proposed to be sustained;

   4. A copy each of the statement of witnesses by whom the articles of charge are proposed to be sustained. In the case of common proceedings, the number of copies of the statements of witnesses should be as many as the number of accused Government servants covered by the inquiry;

   5. List of documents by which the articles of charge are to be proved;

   6. A copy of the Covering Memorandum to the Articles of charge addressed to the Government servant concerned;

   7. Evidence proving the delivery of the documents to the Government servants. The date of receipt of the document by the charged officer should be clearly indicated. The date of receipt of the articles of charge by the Government servant will need to be taken into account by the Inquiring Authority in fixing the date of the first hearing;

   8. A copy of the order appointing the Presenting Officer;

   9. Bio-data of the officer in the prescribed form.

2. The above documents and all other relevant paper should be made available to the Presenting Officer at the earliest possible. If the Government servant has submitted a written statement of defence, the Presenting Officer will carefully examine it. If there are any facts which the Government servant has admitted in his statement, without admitting the charges, a list of such facts should be prepared by the Presenting Officer and brought to the notice of the Inquiry Officer at an appropriate stage of the proceedings so that it may not be necessary to lead any evidence to prove the facts which the Government servant has admitted (c.f. para 7.1 of Chapter XI).

3. Before referring a case to the Inquiry Officer the disciplinary authorities may ensure that they are in possession of the listed documents. While forwarding the case to the Inquiry Officer, the disciplinary authorities may specifically mention that all the listed documents are available with them or with the presenting officer concerned.

1. In inquiries in which a Commissioner for Departmental Inquiries of the Central Vigilance Commission is appointed as the Inquiring Authority against an officer who is under suspension, that fact should be specifically brought to the notice of the Commissioner for Departmental Inquiries indicating the date from which the officer has been under suspension so that the Commissioner for Departmental Inquiries may be able to give priority to such a case.

2. Similar intimation should be sent to Inquiry Officers other than CDIs as well, as this would enable them to accord priority to such cases.

1. Under Rule 18 of Classification, Control and Appeal Rules where two or more Government servants are concerned in any case, the President or any other authority competent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service on all the accused Government servants may make an order directing that disciplinary action against all of them be taken in a common proceeding. If the authorities competent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service on such Government servants are different, an order for common proceedings may be made by the highest of such authorities with the consent of the others. Such an order should specify:

   1. the authority which may function as the disciplinary authority for the purpose of such common proceedings;

   2. the penalties which such disciplinary authority will be competent to impose;

   3. whether the proceedings shall be initiated as for a major penalty or for a minor penalty. A standard form of the order is given in Section E.

2. If the alleged misconduct has been committed jointly by person who has retired from Government service and a person who is still in service, common proceedings against them cannot be started. Proceedings against the retired person will be held under Rule 9 of the CCS (Pension) Rules, 1972 and against the persons in service under Rule 14 of the CCA Rules. The oral inquiry against both of them could,however, be entrusted to the same Inquiring Authority

3. A joint proceeding against the accused and accuser is an irregularity which should be avoided.

4. It may also happen that two or more Government servants governed by different disciplinary rules may be concerned in a case. In such cases proceedings will have to be instituted separately in accordance with the rules applicable to each of the Government servant concerned.

1. Rule 19 of CCA Rules provides that notwithstanding anything contained in Rules 14 to 18 :-

   1. where any penalty is proposed to be imposed on a Government servant on the ground of conduct which has led to his conviction on a criminal charge, or

   2. where the disciplinary authority is satisfied for reasons to be recorded by it in writing that it is not reasonably practicable to hold an inquiry in the manner provided in the CCA Rules, or

   3. where the President is satisfied that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to hold any inquiry in the manner provided in the CCA Rules the disciplinary authority may consider the circumstances of the case and make such orders thereon as it deems fit. The Union Public Service Commission will be consulted where such consultation is necessary before any order are made in any case under this rule.

2. In a case where a public servant has been convicted by a Court of Law of any penal offence but dealt with under Section 3 or 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958, he shall not suffer any disqualification because of the provisions of Section 12 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 which reads as follows:-

   Notwithstanding anything contained in any other law, a person found guilty of an offence and dealt with under the provisions of Section 3 or Section 4 shall not suffer disqualification if any, attaching to a conviction of an offence under such law. Provided that nothing in the section shall apply to a person who, after his released under section 4, is subsequently sentenced for the original office The question whether action under Rule 19(1) of the CCA Rules can be taken against a Government servant, who though convicted by a Court of Law but is not to suffer any disqualification because he has been dealt with under Section 3 or 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, has been considered in consultation with the Ministry of Law and on the basis of the Andhra Pradesh High Court's Judgement in A. Satyanarayana Murthy Vs. Zonal Manager, L.I.C. (AIR 69 A.P. 371). It has been decided that the order under Rule 19(i) of CCA Rules should be passed on the ground of conduct which led to the conviction of the Government servant and no because of the conviction, in view of Section 12 of the Probation of the Offenders Act.

3. In cases where an inquiry is to be dispensed with in the interest of the security of the State vide (iii) above, the order of the President should be obtained in such cases. For this purpose, it will be sufficient if the orders of the Minister-in-charge are obtained as the Supreme Court, in Shamsher Singh's Case (AIR 1974 SC 2192) have over ruled their earlier decision in the case of Sardari Lal Vs. The Union of India and others (Civil Appeal No.576 of 1969), under which each such case has to be submitted to the President, for orders. The Supreme Court has now clearly pointed out that the Rules of Business and the allocation among the Ministers of the said business, indicate that the rules of business made under Article 77 (3) in the case of President and Article 166 (3) in the case of Governor of the State is the decision of the President or the Governor respectively. In the said judgement it has been held that neither the President nor the Governor has to exercise the executive functions personally. It would thus, be clear that the requirement of proviso (c) to Article 311 (2) of the Constitution and Rule 19 (iii) of the CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 would be satisfied if the matter is submitted to the Minister-in-charge under the relevant rules of business and it receives the approval of the Minister.

1. The All India Services (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1969 are to a great extent in conformity with CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965. Under Rule 7 of the All India Services (Discipline & Appeal ) Rules, 1969, disciplinary proceedings can be initiated in cases of act or omission committed before the officer was appointed to the service by the Government under whom he is for the time being serving. In respect of an act or omission committed after appointment to the service, the Government under whom such member was serving at the time of the commission of such act or omission alone is competent to institute the disciplinary proceedings. The Government under whom he is serving at the time of the institution of the disciplinary proceedings shall be bound to render all reasonable facilities to the Government instituting and conducting such proceedings.

2. The Central and the State Governments have a concurrent jurisdiction to initiate proceedings in respect of members of All India Services. The State Governments are also competent to impose any of the penalties mentioned in Rule 6 except the penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement. These penalties can be imposed only by the Central Government. In cases where the State Government has conducted the disciplinary proceedings but is of the opinion that the penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement should be imposed, the State Government shall forward the records of the inquiry to the Central Government suggesting the imposition of these penalties. The Government may act on the evidence on record or may, if it is of the opinion that further examination of any of the witnesses is necessary in the interest of justice, recall the witness and examine, cross examine and re-examine such witnesses. If the Central Government do not find justification for imposing any of the penalties in a case referred to it by a State Government, the Central Government shall refer the case back to the State Government.

3. In cases where the disciplinary proceedings are initiated and conducted by the Central Government, the Central Vigilance Commission will be consulted at all appropriate stages as laid down in the instructions issued by the Commission from time to time. In cases where the proceedings are initiated and conducted by the State Governments but the final order is to be passed by the Central Government, the Central Government will consult the Central Vigilance Commission before passing the final order.