Departmental enquiry
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 23 March 2024
This query is : Resolved
Audio recordings was made on the compact disc and this was mentioned as one of the management exhibits by the presenting officer and it was accepted by the enquiry officer. In the begining of the enquiry, when CSE questioned the PO to produce the CD, the Presenting Officer said in many times, he will NOT produce any CD of recordings. BUT later he produced the CD after the exit of 1st witness MW1. The MW2 and MW5 only endorsed the CD. MW3 and MW4 the CD was not produced. Though the CD did not contain the charge sheet abusals, but only the voice which was supported by MW2 and MW5 .The CSE defence DW1 said , the voice was not of CSE in the CD. THE EO was in full favour of management. Though I mentioned in writing about PO statements on not producing the CD and this CD was not underwent any tests
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 23 March 2024
has authenticity been challenged in the beginning as far as CD is concerned?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 23 March 2024
Yes. Despite of my strong protest and gave in writing (that Letter was also marked as defence exhibit ) the EO allowed PO to present CD. Later at the conclusion of enquiry eo mentioned the CD as important evidence and verdict went against me
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 23 March 2024
You can challenge the verdict in the appropriate forum i.e., either in the administrative tribunal (if you are a government employee) or before the high court by filing a writ petition or approach labor court (if you are eligible) for remedy and relief.
They have to produce the CD before the regular legal forum where you can challenge the contents of the CD and the genuineness of the CD itself,.
kavksatyanarayana
(Expert) 23 March 2024
Yes. Is the management a government or not? If you are a government employee you can approach the Administrative Tribunal otherwise, labour court for the remedy.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 23 March 2024
thank you verymuch. but after vrs whether administrative tribunal will entertain my case
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 24 March 2024
If you have taken VRS then you are no more an employee, in this situation how can you have any grievances with regard to your service events now.
It clearly indicates that you have accepted the verdict hence your complaint may not be entertained by any legal forum.
If your service was terminated then you could have fought against the decision.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 24 March 2024
I am sorry to be not able to agree with ehe above viws. I humbly express that:-
1. IO never gives a verdict he only gives a decision.
2. The interlocutory decision of the IO is nither appealable nor challengeable in court.
3. It is only the decision of the Disciplinary Authority based on fidings of he IO which is challegebale.
4. Mere gact of have ceseased to be service does not put an end to the constitutional rights arising till date of retirement.
5. The querist is not even clear whether he was taken VR or given penalty of “compulsory retirement” as a consequence of such inquiry.
You are not clear with the acts:-
You have only sated that certain evidence was allowed to be submitted at later stage when witnesses have left.
It is not clear:-
1. Whether cross examination of the witnesses could have been relevant for the aid CD.
2. Whether you requested these witnesses to be recalled and what was the decision of the IO.
3. Who was DW-1 and how he was connected with the CD.
4. Whether you engaged a DEFENCE ASSISTANT in the Inquiry.
5. Whether this CD was listed as a prosecution document in Annexure-III of chargesheet.
6. Whether this CD wa a defence document.
7. What was role of each MWs in the CD.who had recorded / extracted the CD.
8. Did you ever challenge the authenticity of the CD at any stage?
9. Who confirmed authenticity of the CD and when?
10. Whether any objection to the admissibility of the CD raised in your defence brief.
11. What was report of the IO.
12. What was your representation on the report of the IO.
13. Whether report of IO accepted by deptt.
14. What was the penalty?
15. Did you appeal against the penalty under rule 27/29/29A.
Your query is absolutely silent on the dates and it is difficult to conclude if the case has become not mature or time barred for going to CAT.
Initially you have hidden the fact that you have taken VRS (acutely it is “VR” not “VRS”) (now known how many facts are yet to be disclosed by you) Given facts do indicate how this VR is relevant or irrelevant to the right to move to CAT.
You need to meet a layer well versed with service and disciplinary matters.
T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate
(Expert) 24 March 2024
The querist has clearly stated that the verdict was passed on the basis of the evidence but he has not mentioned the the EO passed the verdict.
It is a fact that only the competent authority can pass the verdict or pronounce the decision based on the inquiry report.
Further the querist has stated in his subsequent post that he had taken VRS, hence inferring any doubt about his VRS that whether it was voluntary or forced or otherwise is immaterial to this opinion.
The clarification sought was whether he is eligible for preferring an appeal before the administrative tribunal on the basis of the information provided here.
We should not travel beyond the question to ask the details which are irrelevant to the subject and our opinion can be confined to the matter discussed and not against the untold mysteries.
Sudhir Kumar, Advocate
(Expert) 25 March 2024
With my experience in disciplinary matters, I do no find ti good to advise him anything without these facts. Advise without appreciating facts can be fatal to him.
