GENERAL TIPS – 10

The report of the IO is not binding on the DA, who has to apply his mind and reach his own conclusions.

Where the DA disagrees with the report of the IO, he should state reasons for the difference.

Where the DA agrees with the findings of the IO, it is not necessary to record reasons for it.

Where inquiry has not been held properly, the DA may remit the case for further inquiry.

A DA may consult other authorities, provided he does not accept the advice of others mechanically but applies his own mind to the whole matter before reaching the final conclusions.



Where the CE is exonerated after an inquiry duly held, a second inquiry on the same facts is legally not permissible.

Past bad record cannot be taken into consideration for deciding quantum of punishment unless the CE had a sufficient notice of it.

Lack of efficiency, failure to attain the highest standard or administrative ability does not constitute misconduct.

A conduct inconsistent with the faithful discharge of duties is misconduct.
Final orders by the DA must be speaking orders.

Even in the case of a minor penalty, it is essential to make a speaking order.

A final order passed by the DA must discuss the case, the CE’s defence, the evidence of both parties, the reason why the PO’s evidence is more acceptable than that of the CE.

The DA must record separate findings on each of the charges.

The order of appeal must also be in a speaking order.

With best wishes,
Keshav Ram Singhal
Abbreviation
IO = Inquiry Officer / Enquiry Officer / Inquiring Authority
PO = Presenting Officer
DR = Defence Representative
CE = Charged Employee / Charged Officer
DA = Disciplinary Authority
AA = Appellate Authority