Conducting Departmental Inquiries in a vast organisation is a complex endeavour. The zeal to exercise power and authority to inflict penalty on perceived misconduct has to be blended with the inherent obligations of a judicial authority to be fair, equitable and just. On the one hand you may feel that you can only be slack at the expense of maintaining the purity of your administration. On the other hand, if you seem to be harsh or unfair, your employees may get demoralized and the vigilant judiciary may review and reverse your order. Over all discipline management has to be part of the human resource development objectives of the organization and these two (i.e. HRD and discipline enforcement) cannot function at cross roads. Expenditure on discipline enforcement has to be kept at check, so that, more funds are available for training and development of the employees, which will directly serve as the best discipline generating device. In short disciplinary proceedings have to be conducted based on three requirements as under-

• It should be conducted objectively, honestly and fairly in conformity with quasi-judicial norms

• It should be based on smooth, uniform, impartial and established procedures, facilitating quick disposal in a cost effective manner. Each functionary should know in exact terms his precise role, and the Do's and Don'ts therein

• It should be managed with the beneficial content to secure specific organizational goals to improve organizational purity, cleanliness, productivity and efficiency in the use of human resources. It should facilitate better return on the human resources employed. It should promote a clean and pure environment and lead to employee morale and not otherwise.

Discipline management must result in a better work-environment. It is not a mere prevention of indiscipline, but generation of positive discipline that should be the goal. It should help to weed off the unfaithful workers, with no harm or injury to the deserving and diligent. It should prevent the virus of recklessness and gross negligence in employee performance. Consequently it should serve to generate a commitment to quality and efficiency in work-culture.

Finally the weapon should be so designed and enforced, that the need to make use of it arises only sparingly. It should be intended as a tool for exception-management to be rarely administered. This is possible only if discipline, purity and cleanliness in service are accepted as a way of life by the majority of the employees. It should not serve as a weapon to fight against the employees, but as a cure against indiscipline. It should be viewed as an inevitable action or a bitter pill, which has to be accepted and only rarely administered, as the ultimate remedy to maintain the good health of the organization. All this is possible if the functions of internal audit, discipline management and employee training, development and motivation are blended in a single and coordinated stream.

Departmental Inquiry involves diverse responsibilities. The Disciplinary Authority has to combine manifold skills and comprehensive knowledge in such areas comprising Service-Law, Inquiry-procedures, and knowledge of effective management of human resources. Added to this is the paramount need for an intrinsic understanding of the corporate mission and objectives of the Organization and synchronizing discipline enforcement therewith. Handled diligently with a judicial objective and humane understanding, the system can secure an environment of cleanliness and purity, which in turn can add to the efficiency and effectiveness of the organization. The ultimate objective should be to merge with the corporate goal of more efficient service, more customers, more turnover and added profitability. The system should bring a transparency of corporate mission and policies aimed at promoting honest and efficient employees and encouraging and promoting those who are yet to reach the goal of total efficiency and commitment, to reach that stage.

Setting the aforesaid objectives, the literature on Departmental Inquiry covers the subject under eight pages as listed in the margin to the left.

There are also two pages on "Positive Approach - Promoting Employees as Human Capital", to explain how well-managed corporates and multinational concerns in the private sector are able to secure better discipline and employee-motivation, without resorting to frequent charge sheeting and conducting elaborate disciplinary proceedings, in their HRD policy.

An intricate topic, by splitting it into a number of smaller parts, results in reduced complexity and brings better clarity. Following this maxim the project literature on departmental inquiry is divided into seven parts. After narrating the essentials of the subject involving diverse objectives to be fulfilled in this introductory chapter, We have proceeded to define the basic legal and ethical requirements for conducting disciplinary proceedings in the next chapter and have followed this in the subsequent chapters (web pages) with ways of making departmental inquiry conducive towards a better use of the human resources of the organization. Thereafter we have discussed the life cycle span for departmental inquiry incorporating requisites discussed in the earlier pages.

After giving the details of the life cycle of departmental inquiry under part -I of the project, the role profile for each participant in this quasi-judicial function is discussed separately under part -II.

There is also function-wise handling of specialised processes connected with the inquiry under part-III.

Negative features creeping in Disciplinary Proceedings (indiscipline and inefficiency in handling discipline management) is dealt with in part -IV.

Part V includes essential Annexure, viz. text of the DA Regulation of PNB; C.C.S.(C.C.A)Rules, 1965; Chapters 10,11 & 12 of Manual of C.V.C. for conducting disciplinary proceedings that is relevant for Bank officers; and special chapter of CVC about discipline management in banks.

Law is difficult to understand and needs a lawyer to explain and a judge to interpret. Much more obscure is procedural law, which prescribes procedures for securing judicial action/remedies. But quasi-judicial rules & regulations (law) untie and detach all legal complexities and technicalities, and retain only the core principles and operational guidelines of law to make it easy for administrative officers to handle and adjudicate. Legality is removed and core spirit of law is retained. But then why is departmental inquiry described as involving complexities?

The Disciplinary Authority is called upon to discharge the two functions of "a prosecutor and a Judge" simultaneously. Here it is also judicial activity accepted as part of corporate management. The disciplinary authority has to balance his role as a quasi-judicial authority with that of a "Corporate-Goal-committed-Personnel Manager". He cannot succeed in one and fail in another. He cannot also succeed as a "prosecutor" and fail as a "judge" or vice versa. He has to strike a synthetic fusion of corporate governance and judicial objectivity and of "prosecution" and "adjudication". His task is therefore more difficult than that of a judicial officer.

Further what is difficult to understand initially, once grasped and mastered becomes easy to implement in a routine manner. This is the case with lawyers and judges who deal with law and justice. On the other hand what is shown as simple, leaves several gaps in specific contingencies, and one finds it difficult to proceed on those occasions, as he feels the lack of specific and clear guidelines.

All these render complexities to his task. These are explained in this chapter followed by a discussion of the evolution of the system of conducting departmental Inquiries for civil and government servants in India in the next chapter.

Understanding the historical perspective will be helpful. It will enable you to appreciate the basic ingredients of inquiry process, and also bestow clarity to you in your role content, when you handle an Inquiry either as an Inquiry Officer, a Presenting Officer or as a Disciplinary Authority or else, happen to be in the receiving side of a domestic inquiry i.e. as a charged officer.