Disciplinary authority has appointed second enquiry officer and rejected the report filed by the first enquiry officer. The disciplinary authority is not happy with the report submitted by the enquiry officer. Then the authority appointed another officer with the sole intention to hold me guilty. The current enquiry officer is taking favour of disciplinary authority. The proceeding is conducted under Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rule 1965. The enquiry officer is compelling the witnesses to falsely implicate me. However, no documentary evidence is available to show that I have been involved in the commission of the alleged offence. The department has filed a first information report against three officers. Due to lack of evidence I am not named in that FIR. Whereas, disciplinary authority is willing to array me in that proceedings.
Asked from: Haryana
More than one inquiry is not permissible under Rule 15 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control, and Appeal) Rules, 1965. However, in exceptional circumstances, the disciplinary authority may direct a further inquiry by the same inquiry officer if a serious defect is found in the enquiry report.
The hon’ble Supreme Court has held in K. R. Deb vs CCE (1971) 2 SCC 102 that there can be only one enquiry. The mere non-acceptance of the inquiry officer’s report by the disciplinary authority is not a valid ground for setting aside the inquiry report entirely and ordering a second inquiry.
In this situation, you should challenge the order appointing a second inquiry officer and the initiation of a second inquiry in the same matter. File an original application before the Central Administrative Tribunal, as the subsequent inquiry violates Rule 15 of the CCS Rules, 1965. Regarding the partiality of the second inquiry officer, there is no need to challenge it at this stage, as the appointment of the second inquiry officer itself is inherently illegal. The CAT may set aside the order of appointment of the second enquiry officer.
Also read: Disciplinary authority is not taking final decision of enquiry report