Departmental Enquiry Dilemma: Can an Officer's Defense Be Critiqued Without Fair Case Establishment?

In departmental enquiries, can the Enquiry Officer refer to the contentions and arguments of the charged officer in defense without reference to the contentions and arguments of the presenting officer and give a report solely finding defects in defense?

Can the department rely on the defects in defense without establishing its case and report against the employee?

Purpose of a Domestic Enquiry

The purpose of a domestic enquiry or departmental enquiry is to prove the charges of misconduct alleged by affording all reasonable opportunities to the delinquent, as per the Principles of Natural Justice. Even though the Enquiry Officer is appointed by the management and may be an outside professional or a subordinate officer to the disciplinary authority of the establishment, he is deemed to be an independent authority in the matter of enquiry.

Therefore, what is more important is that there should be no bias on the part of the enquiry officer, both in the conduct of the enquiry and in his findings as well. "Bias" means "a predisposition to decide for or against one party without proper regard to the true merits of the dispute." In disciplinary proceedings, the onus of proving the charge lies on the shoulders of the prosecution. Therefore, if the enquiry officer reaches his conclusion without adverting to the contentions of the prosecution but solely based on the defects noticed in the defense, certainly he is biased, and on this score, the enquiry can be vitiated.

Regards

Sir,

Thanks for the reply. Can you cite any authorities/citations in this regard? Can the department also depend on the flaws in the defense for proving the charges?

Thank you.

In the absence of a proper description of the type of defects in the defense pointed out by the E.O./I.O., whether they are in agreement or conflict with the P.O.'s contentions, or relate to the evidence presented during the inquiry proceedings, your query is merely academic and may elicit varied and conflicting answers from readers/experts.

Nevertheless, since the P.O.'s report is provided to the charged official well before the submission of the defense brief, it is the responsibility of the charged officer to address the charges or contentions of the P.O., based on the evidence gathered during the inquiry proceedings. Both the submissions of the P.O. and the Defense are independent in nature, aimed at clarifying the viewpoints of the E.O. on the case. The Defense is free to counter any adverse contentions raised by the P.O. by presenting facts through their defense brief to prevent bias from influencing the E.O.

The evidence presented during the inquiry proceedings holds paramount importance for the Enquiry Officer's findings, rather than the contentions of the P.O. The Defense is given the opportunity to provide their observations on the P.O.'s contentions. If the Defense does not address the P.O.'s contentions, the Enquiry Officer is expected to evaluate the evidence vis-a-vis the Defense's submissions, provided they are specific to the charges and do not introduce extraneous issues. The Enquiry Officer can then provide observations on the Defense's submissions based on the evidence analysis and findings.

The Enquiry Officer cannot base findings on personal knowledge or assumptions but must rely solely on the evidence presented during the inquiry. Any deviation from this may lead to bias or prejudice.

If you are encountering such issues, it is essential to provide a detailed description of the case for appropriate assistance.