TMI Blog2004 (10) TMI 592X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... emanding illegal gratification. Pursuant to the complaint, the High Court directed an inquiry by the Prothonotary Senior Master of the High Court and he examined some of the witnesses and based on the information collected by the Prothonotary Senior Master, disciplinary proceedings were initiated against these two appellants. An Additional Registrar of the High Court was appointed as an Enquiry Officer. The appellants were given opportunity to submit their written representations before the Enquiry Officer. The gist of allegation levelled against these two appellants was that Ms. Vasanti Joshi gave three documents in Marathi and one document in Gujarati for being translated into English and the appellants in both the appeals demanded a sum of ₹ 650 and ₹ 350 as bribe. The Enquiry Officer, after a detailed enquiry, found that these appellants were not guilty of the charge framed against them. The report was placed before the disciplinary authority and the disciplinary authority disagreed with the findings of the Enquiry Officer and came to the conclusion that these appellants were guilty of having demanded the illegal gratification from the complainant. A copy of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disciplinary authority. The contention was that by virtue of rule 8, according to the appellants' counsel, though the report of the enquiry officer was furnished, the appellants were not given an effective opportunity to place their arguments against this and it was contended that even before the issuance of show cause notice, and the disciplinary authority had made up his mind and had already taken a decision disagreeing with the enquiry officer and seeking an explanation from the delinquent officers was only an empty formality and there was thus serious violation of principles of natural justice. The relevant rule of the Bombay rules reads as follows: 8. Action on the inquiry report :-(I) The disciplinary authority, if it is not itself the inquiring authority may, for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, remit the case to the inquiring authority who shall thereupon proceed to hold the further inquiry according to the provisions of rule 7 of these Rules as far as may be. (2) The disciplinary authority shall if it is not the enquiring authority, consider the record of the inquiry and record its findings on each charge. If it disagrees with the findings of the inqu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reasons for such disagreement. Sub-rule 4(i) (a) of Rule 8 of the Bombay rules further shows that the copy of the report of the enquiry officer and his finding on each article of charge together with brief reasons shall be given to the delinquent employee. The rule further says that the disciplinary authority shall give its reasons for disagreeing with the decision of the enquiry officer. The counsel for the appellants contended that even if the rule does not specifically says that the delinquent employee should be given personal hearing when it disagree with the enquiry officer, the same shall be read into the provision and the delinquent employee shall be given an opportunity of personal hearing before a final decision is taken in the matter. In this connection, reliance was placed on the decision of this Court in the case of Punjab National-Bank and Ors. v. Kuni Behari Misra etc., [1998] 7 SCC 84. In this case Court was interpreting the Regulation 7 of the Punjab National Bank Officer Employees' (Discipline and Appeal) Regulations, 1977. The said regulation states that the disciplinary authority if it disagrees with the findings of the enquiry officer he can give his reason ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proposed to disagree with the findings of the enquiry officer This is in consonance with the requirement of Article 311(2) of the Constitution as it provides that a person shall not be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an enquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges. So long as a final decision is not taken in the matter, the enquiry shall be deemed to be pending. Mere submission of findings to the disciplinary authority does not bring about the closure of the enquiry proceedings. The enquiry proceedings would come to an end only when the findings have been considered by the disciplinary authority and the charges are either held to be not proved or found to be proved and in that event punishment is inflicted upon the delinquent. That being so, the right to be heard would be available to the delinquent up to the final stage. This right being a constitutional right of the employee cannot be taken away by any legislative enactment or service rule including rules made under Article 309 of the Constitution. Relying on these decisions, the counsel for the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
