TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 1219X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the CAT and by the High Court. The action has been taken against the respondent in Rule 14(3) of the CCS(CCA) Rules which enjoins the disciplinary authority to draw up or cause to be drawn up the substance of imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour into definite and distinct articles of charges. The term cause to be drawn up does not mean that the definite and distinct articles of charges once drawn up do not have to be approved by the disciplinary authority. The term cause to be drawn up merely refers to a delegation by the disciplinary authority to a subordinate authority to perform the task of drawing up substance of proposed definite and distinct articles of charge sheet . These proposed articles of charge would only be finalized upon approval by the disciplinary authority. The Court in the case P.V. SRINIVASA SASTRY VERSUS COMPTROLLER AUDITOR GENERAL [ 1992 (12) TMI 222 - SUPREME COURT] : HELD THAT:- Undoubtedly Article 311(1) does not say that even the departmental proceeding must be initiated only by the appointing authority. Inconsistency with Article 311 of the Constitution - HELD THAT:- At the same time it is pointed out by the court that However, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that in 2003 the respondent was alleged to have approached one Chartered Accountant in Chennai for securing his transfer to Mumbai by offering bribe to the P.A. to the then Minister of State (Revenue). Thus, the charge levelled against the respondent was that he failed to maintain integrity; and exhibited a conduct which is unbecoming of a government servant. The respondent submitted his reply to the allegations wherein he denied the charges levelled against him. He requested for supply of certain documents. In due course, the Inquiry Officer and the Presenting Officer were appointed. 5. During the pendency of the inquiry proceedings, the respondents filed O.A. No.800 of 2008. In these proceedings, the respondents claimed that the charge sheet dated 7th/8th September, 2005 is without jurisdiction, therefore, liable to be quashed, as the charge memo had not been approved by the Finance Minister. We may also notice here that prior to filing of the aforesaid O.A., the respondent had already approached CAT twice: firstly, seeking direction(s) to the Union of India to supply all the documents relied upon in connection with the charge-sheet issued against him. Secondly, seeking a dire ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mplaint involves a vigilance angle, a preliminary investigation is conducted. During the preliminary investigation, the version of the officer concerned is also taken. Thereafter, the decision is taken by the Chief Vigilance Officer (hereinafter referred to as CVO ) with the approval of Central Board of Direct Taxes as to whether disciplinary proceedings are to be initiated. In case, the CVO decides to initiate disciplinary proceedings, the matter is then referred to the Chief Vigilance Commission for first stage advice. The Chief Vigilance Commission examines the first stage advice. In case the Chief Vigilance Commission concurs with the decision taken by the Chief Vigilance Officer, a detailed note is prepared for initiation of disciplinary proceedings which is put up to the Finance Minister. She emphasised that alongwith note for initiation of disciplinary proceedings, all relevant supporting material is also placed before the Finance Minister. It is upon consideration of the entire material alongwith the explanatory note that the Finance Minister takes a decision to initiate departmental proceedings. In view of the aforesaid elaborate procedure, the CAT as well as the High Cou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der prescribed the competent authority for granting approval at different stages. It does not prescribe the stages which require approval. She further submitted that the High Court has misinterpreted clause (8) of the aforesaid order. She points out that the expression approval for issuing charge memo cannot be read as distinct from approval for initiating major penalty proceedings . According to the learned ASG, the office order dated 19th July, 2005 does not impose any requirement that the charge memo must be approved by the disciplinary authority. Clause (8) of the office order, according to Ms. Indira Jaising, only provides that the Finance Minister is the competent authority for granting approval for issuing charge memo , and not for approving the charge memo . She submits that the procedure for drawing up the charge memo commences when approval is sought for initiation of the disciplinary proceedings. The actual drawing up of the charge memo is a part of and incidental to the approval to initiate disciplinary proceedings and is a ministerial act. The approval to initiate disciplinary proceedings is the approval to set the law in motion and carries with it, by necessary i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prabhash Chandra Mirdha [2012 (11) SCC 565] 15. In support of her submission that it is not necessary that charge sheet should be framed by the authority competent to impose penalty or that enquiry should be conducted by such authority alone, reliance was placed on Inspector General of Police Anr. Vs. Thavasiappan.[ 1996 (2) SCC 145] 16. Further, it was submitted that it is in the interest of good administration to interpret said the office order in the manner as contended by the learned ASG since there are more than 500 enquiries that have been initiated in the aforesaid manner. 17. Lastly, it was submitted that the appellants, out of abundant caution, have now amended the procedure and seek the approval of the Finance Minister for charge memo. Respondents Submissions: 18. Mr. P.S. Patwalia, learned senior counsel, submitted that provisions of CCS (CCA) Rules 1965 are applicable to the respondent, an officer of Indian Revenue Service. And that since the charge sheet that was issued to him contemplated a major penalty, Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules is attracted. Reliance was placed upon Registrar of Cooperative Society Vs. F.X. Fernando, (supra) to contend that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Written Submission of Defence, then the file has to be put up to the Finance Minister. Learned Senior Counsel states that if dropping/modification/amendment of charges is required to be undertaken by the Finance Minister then it would necessarily mean that the initial approval of the charge sheet has to be sanctioned by the said minister only. It was further submitted that acceptance of the stand of the appellant that approval granted to initiation of proceedings includes approval to the charge-memo would lead to the position where the charge memo would get approval even before it has come into existence. 23. Mr. Patwalia further submitted that the issue in the present case has already been decided by this Court in Steel Authority of India, Successor of Bokaro Steel Ltd. Vs. Presiding Officer, Labour Court at Bokaro Steel City, Dhanbad Anr.[ 1980 (3) SCC 734] It was also submitted that since the law laid down in the aforesaid case is in the favour of the present Respondents, the present appeals are liable to be dismissed. 24. Mr. Patwalia has also submitted that the appellants, in the application for condonation of delay in filing of the present appeals, contended that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat matters pertaining to any such disciplinary action cannot be further delegated or sub-delegated to any other authority as the President has delegated this authority only to the Finance Minister. 27. Relying on Rule 14 of CCS (CCA) Rules, learned senior counsel submitted that the rule contemplates a detailed procedure, consisting of four stages, which has to be completed before any punishment can be imposed on a public servant. These steps are : i) Initiation of Disciplinary proceedings for major penalties; ii) drawing up of charges of misconduct; iii) appointment of Inquiry Officer Presenting Officer and to supervise fair conducting of inquiry by the Inquiry Officer; iv) imposition of penalty, if any. All the above procedures have been elaborated in provisions of Rule 14 of Central Civil Services (Classification, Control Appeal) Rules, 1965, which require an independent unbiased application of mind and approval, directly by the Finance Minister and not by any other subordinate Authority. 28. Learned senior counsel also submitted that the drawing up charges of misconduct and issuance/service of charge memo is a crucial function for conducting an inquir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onstitution provides for the same. In this context, reliance was placed on Sahni Silk Mills (P) Ltd. Anr. Vs. E.S.I. Corporation[1994 (5) SCC 346] and Director General, ESI Anr. Vs. T.Abdul Razak.[ (1996) 4 SCC 708] 33. Learned senior Counsel further submitted that the provisions of Rule 14 (2) of CCS (CCA) Rules are separate provisions. In case, the approval of the Finance Minister is taken only for provision of Rule 14 (2) and no approval is taken for acting under Rule 14(3), then the provision of Rule 14(3) would be rendered redundant and obsolete. Such a position, he submits, would mean as if no charges were ever framed by the Disciplinary Authority. 34. It was further submitted that the charges were framed only on the basis of the recommendations of CBI, which is not the recommending authority as per the CCS (CCA) Rules. 35. Mr. Shekhar Kumar, learned counsel, submitted that the contention of the learned ASG that no prejudice would be caused to the Respondent is premised on an incorrect notion. Learned counsel further submitted that since the intention of the Government is manifest in the office order No. 205 of 2005, the said order has to be complied with strictly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the charge sheet. Rule 14(4) again mandates that the disciplinary authority shall deliver or cause to be delivered to the government servant, a copy of the articles of charge, the statement of the imputations of misconduct or misbehaviour and the supporting documents including a list of witnesses by which each article of charge is proposed to be proved. We are unable to interpret this provision as suggested by the Additional Solicitor General, that once the disciplinary authority approves the initiation of the disciplinary proceedings, the charge sheet can be drawn up by an authority other than the disciplinary authority. This would destroy the underlying protection guaranteed under Article 311(1) of the Constitution of India. Such procedure would also do violence to the protective provisions contained under Article 311(2) which ensures that no public servant is dismissed, removed or suspended without following a fair procedure in which he/she has been given a reasonable opportunity to meet the allegations contained in the charge sheet. Such a charge sheet can only be issued upon approval by the appointing authority i.e. Finance Minister. 41. In fact, issuance of the office ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r initiating major penalty proceedings. Under Clause (9), the department firstly puts up the file before the Finance Minister seeking approval for issuing charge memo/sanction of prosecution. The department is seeking an order as to whether the officer is to be proceeded against departmentally or criminal proceedings are to be initiated or both proceedings are to be commenced simultaneously. When the decision is taken by the Finance Minister that the departmental proceedings are to be held (initiation), only then the question of approval of charge memo arises. The department would thereafter complete the necessary formalities and then place the file before the Finance Minster, for approval of charge memo. This provision is in harmony with the mandate contained under Articles 311(1) and (2) that no civil servant shall be dismissed or removed by an authority subordinating to that by which he was appointed. The second limb of the same direction is that punishment on a public servant of dismissal, removal or reduction in rank can only be imposed when the charges have been proved against him in a departmental enquiry held in accordance with the rules of natural justice. Rule 14 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... where it causes administrative inconvenience, except in cases where it may reasonably be inferred that the power was intended to be delegable. Normally the courts are rigorous in requiring the power to be exercised by the precise person or body stated in the statute, and in condemning as ultra vires action taken by agents, sub-committees or delegates, however expressly authorized by the authority endowed with the power. 44. This principle has been given recognition in Sahni Silk Mills (P) Ltd. (supra), wherein it was held as under: 6. By now it is almost settled that the legislature can permit any statutory authority to delegate its power to any other authority, of course, after the policy has been indicated in the statute itself within the framework of which such delegatee (sic) is to exercise the power. The real problem or the controversy arises when there is a sub- delegation. It is said that when Parliament has specifically appointed authority to discharge a function, it cannot be readily presumed that it had intended that its delegate should be free to empower another person or body to act in its place. 45. Much was sought to be made by Ms. Indira Jaising on clause (1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also, a perusal of the record would show that the file was put up to the Finance Minister by the Director General of Income Tax (Vigilance) seeking the approval of the Finance Minister for sanctioning prosecution against one officer and for initiation of major penalty proceeding under Rule 3(1)(i) and (3) (1) (iii) of the Central Civil Services (Conduct) Rules against the officers mentioned in the note which included the appellant herein. Ultimately, it appears that the charge memo was not put up for approval by the Finance Minister. Therefore, it would not be possible to accept the submission of Ms. Indira Jaising that the approval granted by the Finance Minister for initiation of departmental proceedings would also amount to approval of the charge memo. 46. Ms. Indira Jaising also submitted that the purpose behind Article 311, Rule 14 and also the Office Order of 2005 is to ensure that only an authority that is not subordinate to the appointing authority takes disciplinary action and that rules of natural justice are complied with. According to the learned Addl. Solicitor General, the respondent is not claiming that rules of natural justice have been violated as the charge me ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
