my friend is in government service governed by the central government rules. he has some matrimonial disputes and being known to this that the matter is subjudice, the HOD of the said department initiated an inquiry under rule 14 for penalising major penalty.
my friend objected to this vide rule 12(2) of CCS(CCA) Rules that since the HOD is personally concerned with his case, he can't act as disciplinary authority in his case and prefer an appeal to Appellate Authority of the said department but surprisingly the said request has been disposed by the same disciplinary authority and later on the same disciplinary authority has put my friend under suspension pending criminal case against him (a 498-A case was filed by his estranged wife).
later on the EO followed the same path as suggested by the HOD and concluded inquiry ex-parte without disposing of the representation of the delinquent employee.
the delienquet employee later submitted his defence brief and the EO has found him guilty of the offences, which is still pending before supreme court of india. now the HOD has sent the EO report for comments of the charged employee.
the employee prefer an appeal before CAT, PAtna praying for interim relief that the HOD may be restrained to pass any order based on the report of bias EO.
the CAT, PAtna has entertained the application and notice has been issued to government but refused to give the interim relief on the grounds that how we can directed an HOD to pass any order.
the question is now this that whether my friend can prefer an appeal before High Court because after receiving the defence brief of the charged official the bias HOD can passed immediate order for imposing major penalty on him and will make the earlier application of CAT, infructues.
my learned friend can you guide me with suitable remedy as the charged official has to give his defence brief before 1st of february, 2010.
it is very urgent so please suggest with some case laws.
21 January 2010
21 January 2010
For more information and help visit www.airyourlegalqueries.com
21 January 2010
In the given facts, it shall be appropriate if your friend makes approach to High Court as CAT has denied to provide him interim relief and without seeking such relief biased persons cannot be restrained to show more bias attitude towards your friend. It is advised to move fast and obtain the desired relief before passing of any adverse major punishment against the delinquent employee.
22 January 2010
The information furnished is incomplete. How is the HOD biased? Is he related to the wife. If not, mere apprehensions do not constitute a bias.
Secondly, how the case under Section 498A pending before the Supreme Court. If the husband has already been convicted, the pending SLP or appeal is irrelevant in initiating disciplinary proceedings. On the contrary, the HOD is bound by rules to place the official under suspension and initiate disciplinary proceedings.
It may also be noted that the inquiry authority's role is that of fact finding and he is not fault in conducting the proceedings ex-parte if, in spite of repeated chances, the charged officer did not attend the inquiry the hearings. Now, the only option for the employee is to offer his comments on the inquiry report as to any disregard to procedural propriety or any defect in adducing the evidence.
CAT will not generally interfere at this stage of inquiry unless there is serious illegality on the face of the record.
There is no provision for appeal against the orders of the Administrative Tribunal. Only a Writ Petition can be filed under Article 227 of the Constitution.
However, I would be offering all the help I can if complete information is made available.