Supreme Court of India

J.L. JAINversusUNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

Citation: 1996 INSC 263
Decided: 15 February 1996
Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed
Bench: K RAMASWAMYG B PATTANAIK

Holding

The appellate court set aside the impugned order and directed that the employee be given a one‑time opportunity, with proper notice, to participate in the departmental inquiry, examine witnesses, and adduce defence evidence.

Summary

In this civil appeal, the appellant J.L. Jain challenged the decision of the Central Administrative Tribunal that denied a reopening of a departmental inquiry against him. The appellant sought a one‑time opportunity to participate in the inquiry, present his defence, and cross‑examine witnesses. The respondents argued that the inquiry should not be reopened and that any failure to appear would forfeit the appellant's defence. The Court examined the notice and the respondents' affidavit indicating willingness to grant an opportunity, and held that procedural fairness required the inquiry to be reopened with a single chance for the appellant to be heard. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside and the inquiry officer was directed to issue a registered notice giving the appellant 30 days to appear, to make witnesses available for cross‑examination, and to allow a further date for any defence evidence. The Court then allowed the appeal without costs.

Issues considered

Whether a departmental inquiry can be reopened and a one‑time opportunity be granted to the employee to participate and present a defence
Whether failure to participate in the reopened inquiry would forfeit the employee's right to defence

Subjects

departmental inquiryprocedural fairnessemployee rightsre‑opening inquiryone‑time opportunityservice law

Judgment

-                                    J.L. JAIN
                                          v.
                             UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.
                                                                                     A



                                FEBRUARY 15, 1996

                 [K. RAMASWAMY AND G.B. PAITANAIK, JJ.]                              B

            SeTVice Law:

           DepaJtmental Inquiry-Re-opening of-One time opportunity to be
    given to the employee-If the employee fails to participate in the enquiry and
                                                                                     C
-   to conduct his case, he would foifeit his defence-Inquiry Officer to make
    available all witnesses to be examined in proof of the charge-open to the
    employee to cross- examine them-{)pportunity for defence evidence to be
    given-Thereafter inquiry officer would be free to proceed according to mies
    and take appropriate action.

-   1996.
            CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 3636 of
                                                                                     D


          From the Judgment and Order dated 26.10.94 of the Central Ad-
    ministrative Tribunal, New Delhi in O.A. No. 1508 of 1992.
                                                                                     E
            Anis Suhrawardy, Ms. Shomana Anis and Z.A. Khan for the appel-
    lant.

            A.D.N. Rao and Arvind Kr. Sharma for the Respondents.

            The following order pf the Court was delivered :
                                                                                     F
            Leave granted.

            We have heard the counsel on both sides.

          The notice issued in this case itself indicates why the inquiry should     G
    not be reopened; the inquiry officer should not give another opportunity
    to the appellant to participate in the inquiry. It was also stated that if the
    respondent is agreeable to reopen the matter, it would be confined to only
    one time opportunity to appellant and unless the appellant participates in
    the inquiry and conducts his case, he would forfeit his defence. In view of
    the notice and in view of the statement of the respondents in the counter-       H
                                         733
    734                   SUPREME COURT REPORTS                  [1996] 2 S.C.R.

A affidavit that they are agreeable to give an opportunity, the impugned order
  is set aside and opportunity is directed to be given to the appellant to
  participate in the inquiry. The inquiry officer is directed fo issue notice to
                                                                                   -
  the appellant by registered post with acknowledgment due giving 30 days'
  time fixing a date on which date the appellant should appear and par-
B ticipate in the inquiry. The inquiry officer is directed to make available all
  the witnesses sought to be examined in proof of the charge on that date
  and it would be open to the appellant to cross-examine those witnesses. If
  the appellant intends to adduce any defence evidence, inquiry officer is
  directed to give another date to the appellant to adduce the same on the
  adjourned day; the inquiry would be completed after examining those
C witnesses. Thereafter, the inquiry officer would be free to proceed accord-
  ing to rules and take appropriate action.

           The appeal is accordingly allowed. No costs.

    G.N.                                                       Appeal allowed.

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Try "departmental inquiry"Sign in to search