Ccs (cca) rules 1965
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 22 November 2011
This query is : Resolved
Dear Sir,
Under CCS (CCA) Rules 1965, whether a Disciplnary Authority (DA) have powers to appoint a Inquiry Officer (IO) who is senior to him by scale ie DA is on Sc`E scale while IO is on Sc`F` scale. Incidentally DA is in Administrative cadre and functioning as DDG, while IO is in scientific cadre and working as Head of Department.
Can this be treated as right appointment or anamoly under above rules
Whether on the above basis the charged official can appeal for quashing the entire disciplinary proceedings or report submitted by the IO at any stage of enquiry, praying that appointment of IO by DA is not proper
Please clarify
Guest
(Expert) 22 November 2011
The only condition for appointment of the I.O. is that he should be senior to the charged officer. Qualification or cadre does not stand in the way of appointment as an I.O.
While the case has to be presented by a Presnting Officer, the same has to be defended by the Defence Assistant and the I.O. acts just like a judge to arive out a reasoned findings based on the facts adduced during the inquiry proceedings.
So, all depends upon, how strong and knowledgeable is the Defence Assistant of the C.O./ Delinquent.
The charged official does not have any right to appeal against appointment of the I.O. He can also not appeal for quashing of the disciplinary proceedings, unless he has a strong proof of bias of the I.O. against him.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 23 November 2011
If such vast unrestricted powers are vested with Disciplinary Authority (DA), than theoreticaly speaking, than a DDG, who is on Sc`E` grade scale, as DA can appoint a Sc`F`or Sc`G` or ADG or DG as IO in a case saying that they are senior to charged official.
Will it be technically speaking correct and proper action by DA
If not, where the datum line for fixing the IO should be drawn by DA
Guest
(Expert) 23 November 2011
Your query is quite unclear to the following extent:
I think you presume that every expert on this forum would be acquainted with the hierarchical structure in each and every organisation of the Government and PSUs when you speak about E, F, G, etc. grades of employees where you have not mde clear about the ranking hierarchy, whereas each and every organisation of the Central Government has different levels of officers. In some organisations ranking of officers is in ascending order and in some others it is in descending order.
Secondly, when you state "where the datum line for fixing the IO should be drawn by DA," what do you intend to point out about datum? Do you mean to say, "data", "a piece of information," or "an assumption/premise from which inferences may be drawn"?
Before posting such a question, I think, at first, you would at least have tried to read the CCS (CCA) Rules even cursorily.
The DA is necessarily required to appoint an I.O. senior in rank (any higher rank) than that of the charged official, not some one junior to him, who could easily be influenced by any one. Where is the question of vast and unrestricted powers of DA?
In your opinion what type of restrictions should have been imposed on the DA?
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 23 November 2011
At the outset, my apologies for any inconvenience caused to you.But you will agree that expert opinion is required only when law is silent and it becomes a grey area requiring interpretation.
Your point that Charged official (CO) should be junior to IO is well documented in the CCS(CCA) Rules and hence requires no expert advice.
I would also like to inform you that all central govt bodies following VI pay commission follow the same pattern (ascending order) of hierarchy ie Sc`B` is juniormost and Sc`G` is seniormost. In other words, Sc B is junior to Sc C. Sc C is junior to Sc D and so on till Sc `G`.
When the decision to appoint the IO is being taken by DA, he has to weigh that up to what level of seniroty of rank of IO has to be taken. Can he chose a IO who is senior to him by scale of pay. In that case, a senior official by rank or pay scale (chosen as IO) will be submitting the Inquiry report to a DA who is junior to him by rank or pay scale. So the DA has to draw a datum line in his mind while proposing a IO to the competent authority.
Since the law is silent over such a situation, hence the query for expert opinion.
Guest
(Expert) 24 November 2011
Thanks dear for your presumptive but incorrect information. That clearly indicates as if you have not gone through the CCS (CCA) Rules and you are trying start a discussion just on hypothetical basis. But, if you think yourself as well informed about the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, you are also supposed to know whether or not the DA can chose an IO, who is senior to him by scale of pay. But, it clearly seems that you are not even aware of the fact that the Disciplinary Authority in Central Government Services for Group A level Officers is the President of India (the highest authority in India) and if any authority appoints an I.O. for Group A level charged officer in any Central Government office, he appoints him only on behalf of the President of India and that too with the delegated powers to him to do so.
But, it would be useless to have any discussion unless you get properly acquainted with CCS (CCA) Rules and the classification of posts in the Central Government establishments, which is quite contrary to your supposition.
So, you may please better read Rules 4 to 6 of the CCS (CCA) Rules to know how the classification of posts in the Central Government offices is made and you would be able to know that Group D posts are of the lowest category of employees, like that of peons. Group C belongs to general clerical posts, while within the category of officers Group B is the lowest grade in them. Group A starts from higher rank to the highest rank of officers, e.g., JTS, STS. JAG, SAG, HAG, etc.
Even in the Central Autonomous bodies the classification pattern is different in each of the organisation. For example in the Bharat Sanchar Nigam Ltd. the classification has been made as Non-executive (NE-1 to NE-11) and is different for the Executive posts (not even A, B, C, D, etc.).
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 24 November 2011
Kindly try to interact in academic manner without putting any charges and please do not quote any thing which is already given in rules.
Kindly take this as example
1.Position of DA in office - DDG in Sc`E` pay scale
2. Position of IO in office- Sc`F`and HOD which is on higher pay scale than Sc`E`
3. Postion of Charged offical(CO) in office - Lower Division Clerk (LDC)
The above example is very simple and requires a straight cut answer.
In above situation, whether appointment of IO is proper by DA. Since the rules are silent in such situations, I feel a proviso is required in the rules
If you do not wish to opine or want to aviod the answer, you may, its your choice, but please do not adopt offensive way of replying.
Let other experts comment over it.
My thanks to you for obliging me twice
