The disciplinary authority is at the focal point of the processes involving a departmental inquiry. His role in the departmental inquiry is not visible to the charged officer, but decisive and covers two stages i.e. pre-inquiry and post-inquiry. He takes cognition of the case at the stage of receipt of the "complaint", and ordering of investigation. He initiates the inquiry process first by deciding, if a charge sheet is to be served or not and later by serving the charge sheet, if so decided under his authority. He need not have to issue charge sheet in each and every case. He will decide the question of serving a charge sheet, not only based on the gravity of the misconduct of delinquent officer, but also keeping in view, the best course of action intended to secure overall better discipline, work efficiency and employee morale.

The strength of the disciplinary case in the subsequent stages of the proceedings will depend much on the groundwork done initially in the pre-inquiry stage by carrying out essential steps, namely

1. the fact finding and comprehensive preliminary investigation, which prima facie establishes, the committal of misconduct by the delinquent officer. In case of doubt, Disciplinary Authority must call for additional information, including ordering a fresh investigation, where necessary and supporting material evidences for the allegations.

2. precise and perfect drafting of the charge sheet, including the approval of evidences intended to prove the imputations, so that it is possible for the presenting officer to present the case convincingly and with ease before the Inquiry Officer. Disciplinary authority may also suitably modify the draft charge sheet, when it is put up before him, if the charge sheet is deficient and lacks essential particulars. He may drop imputations, which consists of insignificant or trifling allegations, to reduce the overload of the Inquiry. He will verify that the articles & imputations are properly expressed and in conformity with the evidences listed.

3. Selecting and appointing competent and experienced officers as Inquiry and Presenting officers. This causes the imputations in the charge sheet to be properly brought out objectively by the Presenting officer, while the Inquiry Officer ensures that the procedure prescribed for inquiry is scrupulously followed and inquiry conducted within boundaries and time schedule.

4. And above all to carry out the entire preliminary process not only with care and efficiency, but without undue delay

The disciplinary process initiated with the serving of Charge Sheet is concluded by the disciplinary authority with the final order signed and issued by him awarding the penalty, when the charges are proved, and exonerating the delinquent officer, when these are not proved. Awarding penalties (major or minor) lies in his exclusive domain. It is necessary that the disciplinary authority is able to assess the gravity of the misconduct of the delinquent employee to award punishment commensurate thereto. Excessive penalties should not be given. On the other hand leaving delinquent officers, who commit questionable misdeeds with a token punishment will reduce the entire process to a nullity and will not act as a preventive deterrent.

Disciplinary proceedings must be initiated without delay after occurrence of the irregularity or misconduct in the discharge of duties by a public servant and the detection thereof. This subject is discussed in more details at the end of this article.

In the initial stage, the disciplinary authority initiates the charge sheeting process. He decides whether the case of the delinquent officer warrants a formal punitive action and if so whether it should administered by

1. merely conveying displeasure by an administrative action or issuing a warning or note of caution without any adverse effect on his service record. Though these steps do not blot his future record, such public admonition acts as powerful correctional tools in respect of most of the sensitive officers, as these serve more as shock treatment, that the officer employee dares not to repeat the same offence again. In fact a simple public admonition of the officer will act as a correctional source, in many cases involving acts of 'negligence', 'failure to bestow proper attention to the job' or 'delay in attention' etc. This silent or preventive step is works more positively with the majority of the average and above average category of the officers and charge sheet is a remedy only for the difficult-to-mend categories

2. If however a disciplinary case has to be initiated, whether it should be conducted under the procedure for minor penalty or major penalty

3. Whether it should be conducted under procedure for vigilance lapses or administrative lapses. Procedure for charge sheets with a vigilance angle is discussed separately later

It can be termed as a quasi-legal document, though containing essentially factual information. Utmost care is needed in drafting the charge sheet. This subject is already emphasised. The draft charge sheet provided in the manual of CVC may be referred for guidance. Needless to say that a charge sheet is to be deemed a complete and self-contained document only when the list of documents and witnesses on behalf of the Disciplinary Authority are simultaneously drawn and attached with the charge sheet. The charge sheet should cover precise and exact information about the lapses committed by the delinquent officer. The exact date or duration and the place where the lapses were committed should be pointedly mentioned in the articles of charge.

A number of witnesses are usually examined during the course of the preliminary inquiry and their statements are recorded. The list of such witnesses should be carefully checked and only those witnesses who will be able to give positive evidence to substantiate the allegations should be included in the statement for production during the oral inquiry. Formal witnesses to only produce documents need not be mentioned in the list of witnesses.

The documents containing evidence in support of the allegations which are proposed to be listed for production during the inquiry should be carefully scrutinised. All material particulars given in the allegations, such as dates, names, makes, figures, totals of amount, etc., should be carefully checked with reference to the original documents and records.

With the issuing of the charge sheet by the disciplinary authority, the statutory operation of the DA Regulations is invoked into operation. All the subsequent steps can only be taken as provided specifically by the Regulations and not otherwise. All powers and obligations of the disciplinary authority are derived from the DA Regulations and he has no discretion to alter, amend or drop observing any of the provisions of the DA Regulations, when it becomes applicable.

The Disciplinary Authority issues the charge sheet either under minor penalty or majar penalty procedure. It is served on the delinquent officer and he is asked to submit a written statement giving reply to the allegations in the charge sheet, also specifically conveying whether he accepts the imputations in the charge sheet or denies the same. The charged officer is allowed a reasonable time to submit his reply, normally 7 to 15 days.

DA Regulations or even CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965, do not provide for a facility for inspection of documents by the charged official for the purpose of submission of the written statement of reply to the charge sheet. At this stage the submission of elaborate statement of defence is not the purpose, but only to give an opportunity to the Charged Officer to admit or deny his guilt. For admitting or denying the charges, no inspection of documents is necessary and that is why such inspection has not been provided for in DA Regulation. If a charged officer admits the charges, there will be no need to hold an inquiry. If he does not, an inquiry will be held at which he will be provided with the fullest opportunity to inspect and take extracts of various

However, notwithstanding the above position or rules, in the interest of timely conclusion of departmental proceedings, as far as possible, copies of the documents and the statements of witnesses relied upon for proving the charges may be furnished to the charged officer along with the charge-sheet. If the documents are bulky and the copies cannot be given to the Charged Officer, he may be given an opportunity to inspect these documents in about 15 days time.

He may also be allowed the facilities to refer to the relevant records needed for his defence, to enable him to submit a brief reply explaining the charges. Such a facility should normally be not denied, when the charge sheet issued refer to incidents more than one or two years old, and had taken place at an earlier branch

A brief reply after verification of the records submitted by the charged officer may contain essential particulars about his possible line of defence in the subsequent inquiry and will have a number of practical utilities as under:

1. The written statement of the delinquent officer in reply to the charge sheet indicating his possible line of defence will be useful for the Presenting officer to examine and properly regulate his strategy for effective presentation of the case before the Inquiry Officer.

2. In some cases the reply may indicate that the irregularities alleged are not of so grave a nature, and this fact will enable the disciplinary authority to close the case without inquiry by awarding a minor penalty or even dropping all or some of the charges, if so warranted. The disciplinary authority has the inherent power to review and modify the articles of charges or drop some of the charges or all the charges after the receipt and examination of the written statement of defence submitted by the charged officer

After receipt of the written statement of reply from the charged officer, the disciplinary authority comes to the forefront again. He decides one of the following alternatives, as the best course of action, after considering the reply of the charged officer,

1. if the charged officer had admitted his omissions in his reply to the charge sheet, the disciplinary authority proceeds directly to award him punishment. No inquiry is necessary in such a case.

2. But in case he denies the charges and also provides in his reply material explaining properly that he is not guilty of the imputations leveled against him, the disciplinary authority has to decide how the disciplinary case is to proceed further,

   • whether a regular inquiry is to be ordered, or

   • it is to be dropped either treating the allegations as without substance or

   • closed simply by issuing an administrative caution/warning, or

   • the case be closed awarding the delinquent officer a minor punishment without further inquiry,

Though nothing prevents the discretion of the disciplinary authority to drop the charges and close the case, based on the written statement of reply of the delinquent officer, as per convention the charge sheet once issued is not closed either without a punishment(at least a 'censure') or an inquiry. Thus if the reply of the delinquent officer indicates that the case against him is weak from the stand point of the management, still it should pursued and oral inquiry allowed to be conducted. The delinquent officer has then to pass through this forum and come out clean, to be able to get exonerated and have the charges against him dropped. However it is justified to close the case by awarding a minor penalty, when the written statement covers a satisfactory explanation of the major items of misconduct, as this will dispense with the need for conducting a costly and time-consuming inquiry.

There may be instances that the imputations are based on totally impossible circumstances, like an instance where the delinquent employee was not at the branch or on duty, when the particular disputed transactions were carried out. It advisable to drop the charge sheet case, in such extreme cases. However the circumstances which resulted in arriving at wrong assumptions initially, should be looked into and persons contributing to such an anomaly should be admonished.

In some case the reply will result in a situation that additional persons have to be included in the charge sheet, or the articles/imputations were to be modified. All such corrections/additions to the charge sheet can be effected by the disciplinary authority, before proceeding with the preliminary inquiry by the inquiry officer.

CVC in its manual has stated as under (vide chapter 10)

The disciplinary authority has the inherent power to review and modify the articles of charges or drop some of the charges or all the charges after the receipt and examination of the written statement of defence submitted by the accused Public servant.

The disciplinary authority is not bound to appoint an Inquiry Officer for conducting an inquiry into the charges which are not admitted by the accused Charged Officer but about which the disciplinary authority is satisfied on the basis of the written statement of defence that there is no further need to proceed with the oral inquiry. The exercise of the powers to drop the charges after consideration of the written statement of defence will be subject to the following conditions:-

1. In cases arising out of investigation by the Central Bureau of Investigation, latter should be consulted before a decision is taken to drop any or all of the charges on the basis of the written statement of defence. The reasons recorded by the disciplinary authority for dropping the charges should also be intimated to the Central Bureau of Investigation.

2. The Central Vigilance Commission should be consulted where the disciplinary proceedings were initiated on the advice of the Commission and the intention is to drop any of or all the charges to be intimated to them.

If the disciplinary authority finds that any or all the charges have not been admitted by the Government servant in his written statement of defence or if no written statement of defence is received by him by the date specified, it may itself inquire into such charges or appoint an Inquiring Authority to inquire into the truth of the charges. Though the CCA Rules permit such an inquiry being made by the disciplinary authority, itself, the normal practice is to appoint another officer as inquiring authority. It should be ensured that the officer so appointed suffers no bias against the charged officer and had no occasion to express an opinion in the earlier stages of the case. The inquiry officer appointed should be senior in rank to the charged officer, and must not be his immediate superior, or one in any way materially interested with the issues covered by the charge sheet. This is another area, calling for proper discretion by the disciplinary authority, as inept handling of the disciplinary case by the Inquiry Officer or Presenting officer, will nullify all the hard labour invested thus far.

Oral Inquiry can also be entrusted to Commissioners of Departmental Inquiries, attached to the CVC, subject to convenience and permission of CVC in respect disciplinary cases with vigilance angle falling within the compulsory advisory jurisdiction of the CVC.

The disciplinary authority will also appoint simultaneously an officer (or any Public Servant) as the Presenting Officer to present on its behalf the case in support of the articles of charge before the Inquiring Authority. Ordinarily an officer employee belonging to the departmental set up, who is conversant with the case will be appointed as the Presenting Officer. An officer, who made the preliminary investigation or inquiry into the case should not be appointed as Presenting Officer.

In the copy of the order(s) appointing the Inquiry officer & Presenting Officer, endorsed to the delinquent officer concerned, he should be asked to name his Defence Assistant before the commencement of the proceedings. The Charged Officer may avail the assistance of any other officer employee, subject to certain qualifications.

As soon as the orders of appointment of the Inquiry Officer and presenting officer are issued, the disciplinary authority will forward to them 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 Charged Officer. If the Charged Officer 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. 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 Charged Officers 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 Charged Officer concerned;

7. Evidence proving the delivery of the documents to the Charged Officers. 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 Charged Officer will need to be taken into account by the Inquiring Authority in fixing the date of the first hearing;

Once these formalities are completed the disciplinary Authority temporarily will recede to the background handing over reins of control to the Inquiry Officer and the Presenting officer to conduct and complete the Inquiry and forward him the Report of Inquiry . However he may be monitoring the progress of the inquiry to ensure that no undue delay takes place in its conduct and completion. Control reverts back to the Disciplinary Authority once the Report of the Inquiry officer is received by him. The steps that he should take in the second stage are discussed in the next chapter.