CHAPTER IX

THE ROLE AND FUNCTIONS OF THE INQUIRY COMMITTEE/

INQUIRY OFFICER IN DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS

901. Introduction:

Rule 9 (2) of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968 refers to the
appointment of Inquiry Officer (IO). It provides that “whenever the Disciplinary
Authority (DA) is of the opinion that there are grounds for inquiring into the truth of
any imputation or miscond uct or misbehaviour of a railway servant, it may itself
inquire into the truth thereof or appoint an authority to inquire into the truth thereof.”
However, unless it is unavoidable, the disciplinary authority should refrain from being
the Inquiry Officer and should instead appoint another officer for the purpose of
conducting inquiry.

902. Who should be appointed as Inquiry Officer:

The principles of natural justice imply “fair hearing”, “unbiased judgement” and “clear
speaking order”. It, therefore, follows that the person to be appointed as Inquiry Officer
:-

(i) should not be interested in the subject matter of the inquiry in any manner;
(ii) should not be biased;
(iii) should not be a witness in the proceedings;
(iv) should not have expressed an opinion about the merits of the case;
(v) should be sufficiently senior to the charged official to evoke confidence of all
concerned;

(vi) should be higher in status to that of the officer who conducted the fact finding
inquiry. This will eliminate the possibility of the Inquiry Officer being influenced
by the findings of the superior officer.

Note:- (1) To facilitate expeditious disposal of disciplinary cases against Group “C” and “D”
officials, full time enquiry officers have been provided on the Railways. The
enquiry organization, which was earlier under the control of the Personnel
Department, has also been brought under the control of the Senior Deputy
General Manager.
{Board’s letters No. 77-E(GC)-1/41 dated 25-2-78 and D.V’s D.O. No. 19/1/72
DG (V)/C. Br., dated 16-11-78 and E(D&A) 2000 RG 6-24 dated 20.2.2001}.

116
903. Application alleging bias against the Inquiry Officer:
Whenever an application alleging bias against the Inquiry Officer is moved by the
Charged Official, the proceedings should be stayed and the application with relevant
material should be forwarded to the Revisionary Authority for consideration and
passing appropriate orders thereon. Such application should be moved as soon as the
charged official becomes aware of the bias. Though no hard and fast rule can be laid
down regarding the time when an application of bias against the Inquiry Officer should
be moved, yet it is advisable that such an application is moved at the earliest after the
appointment of the Inquiry Officer, the reason being that the charged official cannot be
allowed to sit on the fence till the proceedings have progressed sufficiently or have
been completed to move such an application simply because he finds that the decision
is going or likely to go against him.
904. Role and Functions of Inquiry Officer:
904.1 Though the Inquiry Officer is a creation of the disciplinary authority, he is not subject
to the directions or influence of the latter in regard to the conduct of inquiry, evaluation
of evidence, or his findings. He is expected to function independently without any
interference in the discharge of his functions.
904.2 To enable the Inquiry Officer to hold the inquiry, the Disciplinary Authority (DA) is
required to furnish copies of the following documents to the Inquiry Officer (IO)
alongwith his letter of appointment or immediately thereafter :-
(i) a copy of the articles of charge and the statement of imputations of misconduct or
misbehaviour alongwith the list of documents and list of witnesses required to
prove the articles of charge;
(ii) copies of the statements of witnesses, if any, recorded during the preliminary
inquiry/investigation by which the articles of charge are proposed to be sustained.
(iii) evidence proving the delivery of the relevant documents to the charged officer;
(iv) a copy of the statement of defence, if any, submitted by the charged official or a
clear statement that the charged official has not replied to the charge sheet within
the specified time; and
(v) orders appointing the PO
905. Action by the Inquiry Officer:
On receip t of the above documents, the IO will, after studying the documents, send a
notice to the Charged Official within 10 days asking him -
(i) to present himself for a Preliminary Hearing at the appointed time, place and date
so fixed and to name his Defence Assistant.
Note:- (1) The charged official can present his case with the assistance of any
other Railway servant employed on the same Railway as that on which
he is working. The defence counsel should fulfil the conditions as laid

117
 down in the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968.
Nomination of an assisting Railway servant shall not be accepted if he
has three pending cases on hand in which he has to assist.
(2) “Professional lawyers” shall not be permitted to act as defence helpers
in departmental proceedings. Professional lawyers include Law
Assistants.
(3) In the case of a non-gazetted Railway servant an official of a Railway
Trade Union, who is a full time union worker, recognised by the
Railway Administration on which he is working may also be engaged
as Defence Helper. The restriction that at the time of nomination, the
assisting person should not have three pending disciplinary cases on
hand in which he has to assist, will not apply if the nominated defence
helper is a Railway Trade Union Official, provided that not more than
one adjournment of the enquiry will be granted on the ground of his
inability to attend the inquiry.
(Railway Board’s letter No. E (D&A) 69 RG6-38 dated 13-2-1970,
Notification No. E(D&A) 2003/RG6-8 dated 27.5.2005).
(4) The charged official may also present his case with the assistance of a
retired Railway servant provided such a retired Railway servant
concerned should not act as a Defence Helper in more tha n seven cases
at a time and fulfils other conditions laid down in Board’s circular No.
E (D&A) 91 RG6-148 dated 05.11.1992.
(RailwayBoard’s letter No. E(D&A) 2002 RG6-13 dated 14.5.2003).
(ii) He will also intimate to the Presenting Officer (PO) the date, time and place
of Preliminary Hearing.

906. Preliminary Hearing:

906.1 On the day fixed for the Preliminary Hearing, the IO will ask the Charged Official (CO)
:-

(a) whether he pleads guilty to any of the articles of charge, and if not,

(b) whethe r he has any defence to make.

906.2 If the Charged Official pleads guilty unequivocally, to all or any of the charges, the IO
will record the plea, sign the record and obtain the signature of the Charged Official
thereon. In respect of those articles of charge, he has to return a finding of guilt. He
should proceed with the inquiry only in respect of those articles of charge which are not
admitted by the CO in the Preliminary Hearing.

118
906.3 If the Charged Official refuses to plead or omits to plead or pleads not guilty or accepts
charges conditionally, or does not appear on the fixed date without any valid reasons,
the IO will record an order that the Charged Official may for the purpose of preparing
his defence -

(a) inspect all listed documents within five days extendable by another five days;

(b) submit a list of witnesses to be examined on his behalf with their addresses
indicating what issues they will help in clarifying; and

(c) submit a list of additional documents which he wishes to have access to,
indicating the relevance of the documents in the presentation of his case within 10
days extendable by another ten days on the discretion of the IO.

Note :- The request of the charged official to have access to additional documents
which are not mentioned in the list of documents sent to him with the charge sheet will
be considered by the Inquiry Officer and not by the Disciplinary Authority.

906.4 The charged official shall indicate the relevance of the additional documents to the
presentation of his case. If the Railway servant fails to indicate and convince the
Inquiry Officer about the issues to which the production of additional documents are
relevant, Inquiry Officer may reject the request in writing, giving reasons thereof, for
requisitioning the documents. If the documents are relevant, the Inquiry Officer will
arrange to have the documents to be shown to the Railway servant. In case of doubt, a
point may be stretched in favour of the charged official. Even when the Inquiry officer
has decided to call for additional documents, the authority having the custody or
possession of the documents may decide that the production of such documents would
be against public interest or security of State.

{Rule 9 (12) read with Rule 9 (15) and 9 (16) of the Railway Servants (Discipline &
Appeal) Rules, 1968 as amended vide Board’s letter No. E (D&A) 78-RG6-11 dated 6-
2-1980}

906.5 If PO/charged official are present they will be supplied with copies of the above orders
otherwise it will be sent to them through registered post AD to reach them in good time.

907. Regular Hearing:

907.1 On the completion of the preliminaries, i.e., inspection of listed documents and
additional documents by the Charged Official, the Inquiry Officer will fix a date for
Regular Hearing. In the notice sent for the purpose he will indicate the place, date and
time for Regular Hearing. Summons will also be sent to prosecution as well as defence
witnesses. Non-compliance of summons by the charged official can be treated as
‘conduct unbecoming of a government servant’.

119
907.2 On the date of Regular Hearing, PO will present listed documents one by one. Inquiry
Officer who will mark them as Ex.S.1, Ex.S.2, Ex.S.3, (i.e. Prosecution document 1, 2,
3, etc.) if these are not challenged by the CO. A document challenged by the CO can be
marked only when it is produced through a witness, who certifies its genuineness.

907.3 Witnesses on behalf of the Disciplinary Authority will then be examined by the PO
Each witness will be given a number as SW.1, SW.2, SW.3, etc. which means State
Witness 1, State Witness 2, State Witness 3. A new sheet of paper will be used for
recording evidence of each witness. IO may put such questions to a witness as he thinks
fit to bring out the truth so that he has a fair and clear understanding of the case.

907.4 Before the close of the case on behalf of the Disciplinary Authority, PO may, with the
permission of the IO, produce new evidence. An adjournment of 3 clear days before the
production of such new evidence, exclusive of the day of adjournment and the day to
which the inquiry is adjourned, should be given by the IO. New evidence shall not be
permitted to fill up any gaps in the evidence. However, it can be permitted to remove an
inherent lacuna or defect in the evidence which has been produced originally. If the
charged official demands a copy of the list of new evidence allowed to be presented, it
shall be furnished to him. IO may himself call for new evidence or recall and re-
examine any witness. The charged official may also be allowed to bring in new
evidence if production of such evidence is necessary and in the interest of justice.

907.5 After the PO closes the case, the Inquiry Officer shall require the Charged Official to
state his defence, orally or in writing. If the defence is made orally, it shall be recorded
by the IO who will give a copy to the PO after obtaining the signatures of the railway
servant thereon. If the statement of defence is in writing, CO will furnish a copy to the
Presenting Officer.

907.6 The Inquiry Officer shall inquire from the Charged Official whether he would like to be
his own witness. In case CO prefers to become his own witness he will be examined
like any other defence witness. Evidence on behalf of the Charged Official shall then be
recorded.

907.7 Documents produced by the Charged Official will be marked as Ex.D.1, Ex.D.2,
Ex.D.3, etc. Similarly, witnesses examined on behalf of the Charged Official will be
marked as DW.1, DW.2, DW.3, etc. DW stands for Defence Witness.

907.8 On the conclusion of the case of the charged official, the IO may, and shall if the
charged official has not examined himself as his own witness, generally question him
on the circumstances appearing against him in the evidence for the purpose of enabling
the charged official to explain any circumstances appearing against him.

907.9 General questioning of the charged official by the Inquiry Officer on the circumstances
appearing against him (the charged official) is absolutely necessary as a number of
cases have fa iled to stand scrutiny of the Courts on account of the failure of the Inquiry
Officers to observe this technicality. If the charged official does not desire to be

120
 questioned by the Inquiry officer or refuses to offer himself for examination by the
latter, the Inquiry Officer should suitably record this fact in the Daily Order Sheet as
also include the same in his Report.

907.10 The Inquiring Authority may permit the PO and the CO to argue their respective cases
before him. The PO will argue the case first and CO will do so thereafter. The IO may
permit filing of written briefs, if so requested. PO will submit his written brief first to
the IO with a copy to the CO. The CO will, thereafter, submit his brief to the IO with a
copy to the PO. This is because the last word must come from defence. Generally, a
time of 3 to 7 days after conclusion of the oral inquiry should be given for submission
of written briefs.

908. Daily Order Sheet:

Immediately on receipt of his order of appointment, the Inquiry Officer should open a
“Daily Order Sheet”. In the absence of an order sheet, it is difficult to know whether at
the various stages, the Inquiry Officer has violated the procedure without prejudicing
any of the rights of the Government servant (A.K. Das vs. Sr. Supdt. of Post Office,
AIR 1969 A & N 99). Daily Order Sheet thus contains a running record of all important
events occurring during the course of the enquiry as well as the record of the business
transacted on each day of the hearing and the orders passed by the Inquiry Officer on
oral or written representation of both the parties, i.e. Presenting Officer and the
Charged Official. The entries in the daily order sheet should be signed by the Inquiry
Officer to authenticate them. The entries relating to each date of hearing should also be
signed by the Presenting Officer and the Charged Official with date. Since the daily
order sheet is a record of important happenings during the course of enquiry maintained
by the Inquiry Officer, it has to be as per his direction. If the Charged Officer refused to
sign or records an objection on the order sheet at the time of signing, the Inquiry
Officer should record the fact of refusal to sign by the Charged Officer and further give
his comments on the objection and sign the record. He should not enter into an
argument with the Charged Officer on this account. This is because the Supreme Court,
in the case of Union of India vs. T.R.Verma - AIR 1957 SC 882, has held that in the
event of a dispute arising as to what happened before the Inquiry Tribunal, the
statement of the Presiding Officer (i.e. the Inquiry Officer) in that regard is generally to
be taken as correct. The daily order sheet should generally contain:

(i) a date-wise brief record of all important happenings in the course of enquiry;

(ii) a brief statement of all oral or written representations by the Charged Officer or
the Presenting Officer and orders passed thereon by the Inquiry Officer;

(iii) record of business transacted on each day of oral hearing, and

(iv) orders of the Inquiring Authority for holding of hearings, their adjournments, etc.

121
909. Findings on new Charge:

If in the opinion of the IO the proceedings establish an article of charge different from
the original articles of charge, he may not record his findings unless the railway servant
has either admitted the related facts or had a reasonable opportunity of defending
himself against such articles of charge.

910. Ex-parte Inquiry:

If the Charged Officer does not submit his defence within the time specified or does not
appear before IO or otherwise fails or refuses to comply with the provisions of the
rules, the IO may hold the inquiry ex-parte recording reasons for doing so. Even in such
a case, intimation about the next date of hearing is required to be sent by the IO to the
CO on each occasion. A record of the proceedings of each day on which the CO was
not present has to be made available to him to enable him to join the inquiry
subsequently, should he desire to do so.

911. Change of Inquiry Officer:

If an IO is changed in the middle of an inquiry, the new IO shall hear the case from the
stage which it had already reached.

912. Stay of Proceedings:

Disciplinary proceedings should not normally be stayed except under orders of a Court
or under written orders of Disciplinary Authority who should record detailed reasons
for such orders.

913. Standard of Proof:

913.1 The Supreme Court has held that standard of proof required in a disciplinary case is that
of ‘preponderance of probability’ and not ‘proof beyond reasonable doubt’.

913.2 A departmental enquiry is inherently different from judicial proceedings in a Court of

Law and need not be carried out rigidly in accordance with the rules applicable to
judicial proceedings. The Inquiry Officer should ens ure that reasonable opportunity is
given to the accused for defe nding himself in the course of inquiry.

914. Evaluation of Evidence:

914.1 Oral inquiry is a quasi-judicial proceeding. It is held to ascertain the truth or otherwise
of the allegations. It forms the basis on which the disciplinary authority has to take a
decision regarding the penalty, if any, to be imposed. IO’s findings must, therefore, be
based on evidence adduced during the inquiry. Proper evaluation of evidence is most
important.

914.2 The inferences and conclusions should be based upon reason. IO should take particular
care to see that no part of evidence, which the charged official was not given

122
 opportunity to refute, explain or rebut, has been relied on against him. No material from
personal knowledge of the IO which does not form part of evidence should be used
while arriving at conclusions.

914.3 The IO is not the Prosecutor. It is not his duty to somehow prove the charge. He is
appointed to assist the Disciplinary Authority in taking a correct and impartial decision
on the basis of the evidence on record. It is not for him to assume that the accused
officer is guilty and to obtain admissions from him. His objective is to sift the evidence
with a view to arrive at the truth. If instead of putting questions with a view to
elucidating answers for a proper understanding of the facts before him, he resorts to
searching cross-examination with a view to pinning down the accused officer to the
acceptance of any statement/event which is likely to be against his interest, he ceases to
be fair and unbiased judge which is primarily the role of an Inquiry .Officer.
Assumption of such a role defeats the very purpose of holding an impartial inquiry and
thus vitiates the entire process. The Courts ha ve, time and again, held that when the
officer holding the inquiry takes a role different from that of a person who is to
adjudicate on the dispute impartially and without bias he becomes disqualified and the
result of the inquiry cannot be termed as fair or unbiased.

914.4 The most crucial facet of the personality of the official conducting the departmental
inquiry is his impartial approach, as he is performing a quasi-judicial function. His
conduct must be above board so much so that he should not merely be impartial but
also seen to be so, to ensure that the inquiry commands the confidence it deserves. This
aspect assumes greater significance when there is no Presenting Officer. As it is not
feasible to appoint Presenting Officer in majority of the inq uiries, the Inquiry Officer
has to examine/cross examine the witness including the defence witnesses to find out
the truth in the charges.

(Board’s letter No.E(D&A)2000RG 6-60 dated 9.5.2001).

914.5 The main functions of an Inquiry Officer are three fold -

(i) to record both oral and documentary evidence;

(ii) to evaluate evidence;

(iii) to give his findings.

914.6 He is in no case to comment on the quantum of penalty in cases where the charges are
proved as that would amount to going beyond his charter and usurping the function of
the Disciplinary Authority.

915. Report of Inquiry Officer:

915.1 After the evidence has been taken and the arguments are over, the IO writes his report
and submits it to DA alongwith the records of the inquiry. IO becomes functus officio
after he has submitted his report to the DA.

123
915.2 The Inquiry Officer should prepare a report at the conclusion of the enquiry and should
record his findings on each of the charges, supported by reasons therefor. He should
indicate whether the charge(s) is/are fully established, partially established or not
established. The scope of the enquiry should be strictly limited to the charges as
mentioned in the charge-sheet and which are not admitted by the accused.

915.3 The Inquiry Officer’s report should be concise and confined to the subject of the
charges. In the Inquiry Report, the actual findings should be in respect of each of the
charges indicated in the charge-sheet and enquired into, and the wording of the findings
on each of the charges should be clear, precise and unequivocal and not couched in
vague phraseology. The report should be submitted to the Disciplinary Authority with
the complete record.

915.4 As a copy of the Inquiry Report eventually is required to be furnished to the accused
official, the report of the Inquiry Officer should be confined to the charges only. Other
facts coming to the notice of the Inquiry Committee / Inquiry Officer during the course
of enquiry, but having no direct bearing on the charges should be given in a separate
note and not form part of the inquiry report.

916. Guiding Principles for Conducting Inquiries:

(1) The Inquiry Committee/Inquiry Officer is set up to assist the competent authority
in finding out as to whether the accused person is guilty of the offence with which
he is charged. The main function of the Inquiry Committee/Inquiry Officer is to
follow the rules and principles of natural justice in disciplinary proceedings cases.
The accused servant should be given an opportunity of producing the relevant
evidence on which he relies. In the final report it is the duty of the Inquiry
Officer/Inquiry Committee to record his/their findings in respect of each charge
included in the charge sheet and his/their findings should be supported by the
reasons thereof.

(2) The Inquiry Committee/Inquiry Officer should before commencing the inquiry
proceedings ensure that the procedure for issuing charge sheet etc., as laid down
in the Discipline and Appeals Rules, has been fully complied with. If the Inquiry
Committee/Inquiry Officer finds any departure from the rules or any irregularity
in the procedure, the Committee/Inquiry Officer should seek the advice of the
Disciplinary Authority. If any clarifications are necessary on certain points, the
Committee/Inquiry Officer should group all objections together and not raise
them piecemeal. Unnecessary objections should be avoided by the Inquiry
Committee/Inquiry Officer.

(3) It is necessary that the Inquiry Committee/Inquiry Officer should have a complete
and thorough knowledge of the Disciplinary and Appeal Rules so that no lacuna is
allowed in the disciplinary proceedings. They should study the details of the case
in advance and relevant documents and connected papers. The Discipline and
Appeal Rules should not be interpreted generously by the Inquiry Officer/Inquiry

124
 Committee. What is required on their part is to apply the rules correctly in
disciplinary cases.

(4) The Inquiry Committee/Inquiry Officer should not become over-legalistic and
show special indulgence to the accused official. The Inquiry Officer should not
suffer from any misconceptions or preconceived ideas as the role of the Inquiry
Officer is clearly laid down in the Discipline and Appeal Rules and it is the duty
of the Inquiry Officer/Inquiry Committee to study these rules thoroughly and
follow them. Difficulties arise only where the Inquiry Officer / Inquiry Committee
go astray and ignore the statutory rules on the subject or try to be ‘over- legalistic’.

(5) Proceedings should be precisely and carefully worded so as to convey the correct
meaning.

(6) The language used must be such as cannot be interpreted to be defamatory.

(7) The departmental enquiry cases should be promptly disposed of and should not be
retained by the Inquiry Officer for an inordinate length of time. Delays often
result in suppression of relevant facts and evidence. The Inquiry Officer need not
indulge in unnecessary correspondence with the accused on minor matters like
nomination of “Defence Counsel” etc. Some time limit should be fixed and the
Inquiry Officer should proceed with his enquiries thereafter. The accused official
is always interested in prolonging the proceedings which should be discouraged.
Usually dilatory tactics are adopted by the accused official on one pretext or the
other, and this tendency should always be discouraged and curbed.

(8) When dates are fixed for hearing by the Inquiry Officer, he should not postpone
the hearing on flimsy grounds. Absence of one or the other party without
reasonable and sufficient cause should not bind the Inquiry Officer to postpone
the hearing.

(9) The Inquiry Officer should not obtain any certificate from the accused official at
the end of the enquiry that he has been given reasonable opportunity.

(10) Evidence in the form of an affidavit cannot be ruled out in departmental

proceedings. At the same time it cannot be taken as conclusive. The Inquiry
Officer has to decide the value to be attached to an affidavit in each case on merits
on the basis of the totality of evidence including the results of the cross-
examination, etc.

(11) The defence counsel can assist the accused, instruct and guide him in his defence
and can examine, cross-examine and re-examine witnesses. He can also make
submissions before the Inquiry Officer on behalf of the accused. He will,
however, not answer questions on behalf of the accused or prompt the accused in
his answers.

(12) The insistence of the accused official for a particular specified Railway employee
to act as his defence counsel, should not be considered sufficient reason to

125
 adjourn the enquiry, even where the Railway employee concerned cannot be
spared on administrative grounds to attend enquiry.

(13) If the defence counsel endeavours to go beyond his jurisdiction during the course
of the enquiry proceedings, the Inquiry Officer should be firm and intervene
wherever necessary.

(14) If the person assisting or the charged official himself refuses to accept the
decision of the Inquiry Officer / Inquiry Committee on any point, his protest must
be obtained in writing and recorded in the proceedings. When a person assisting
the accused official has resorted to leaving the proceedings where his protest has
been over-ruled, the Inquiry Officer should continue the Inquiry and make a
record of the same in the proceedings. It is open to the Inquiry Officer to instruct
the accused to defend himself with the assistance of another assisting Railway
employee.

(15) In cases investigated by CBI, the Presenting Officer may be an official of CBI
whilst in cases investigated by the Railway Vigilance Branch, the Presenting
Officer may be nominated on the recommendation of the Vigilance Branch and
the person so nominated should be one who has not investigated the case.

(16) Requests for information or facility to examine documents etc. are generally made
in piecemeal by the accused official. This tendency on the part of the charged
official should be curbed by the Inquiry Officer.

(17) It is obligatory on the part of the Inquiry Officer to supply copies of the oral
evidence to the charged official in all cases.

(18) In a departmental enquiry it is not necessary for the Inquiry Officer to furnish to
the charged official copies of the statements made by witnesses in a preliminary
enquiry, or in a police investigation which leads to the enquiry, provided no
references of these witnesses has been made in the chargesheet and the statement
of allegation. At the same time, the statements of these witnesses should not be
made use of in arriving at the findings in the departmental enquiry until and
unless these witnesses are examined by the Inquiry Officer in the presence of the
accused who should also be given an opportunity to cross-examine them.

(19) If the charged official applied orally or in writing for the supply of copies of the
statements of witnesses mentioned in the list sent to him alongwith the charge
sheet, the Inquiry Officer shall furnish him with such copies as early as possible.

126
(20) The Inquiry Officer should not make use of reports of a preliminary enquiry, or
the reports made by the Police after investigation. These reports are not to be
considered in the enquiry. The charged official should not be given access to these
reports. Any reference of such reports should be avoided in the statement of
allegations, but if any reference is made, it would be difficult for the Inquiry
Officer to deny access to these reports.

(21) In a departmental enquiry, the charged official is entitled to cross-examine the

witnesses examined in support of the charges framed against him. This is a very
valuable right and it should be made clear on the record of the proceedings that
the charged official was given the opportunity to cross examine the witnesses.

In a very large number of cases on the Railways, there is no Presenting Officer

and the function of the Presenting Officer in examining and cross-examining the
witnesses, should be done by the Enquiry Officer himself. However, he should
avoid searching cross examination.

[Railway Board’s letters No.E(D&A)70RG6-41 dated 20-10-71 and No.E(D&A)

2000/RG6-60 dated 9.5.2001]

(22) All statements of witnesses should be recorded in writing. Any questions and
answers by the Inquiry Officer and charged official or his defence counsel etc.
should also be recorded. All these should be signed by the witnesses and the
Inquiry Officer on each page. The evidence of witnesses unable to read and write
should be read over and translated to them, and the Inquiry Officer shall certify on
such witness deposition that the statement was read and explained to the deponent
who has admitted it to be correct.

(23) If any person refuses to sign statement of evidence, it should be read out to him in
full and should be signed by the Inquiry Officer certifying that it is a true record
of the evid ence given by the accused or witness.

(24) The Inquiry Officer should ensure that the charged official has been given the
opportunity of adducing all relevant evidence on which he relies. The evidence of
witnesses produced in support of the charges should be taken in the presence of
the charged official and he should be given the opportunity of cross-examining
the witnesses.

(25) If the Inquiry Officer decides to call new witnesses in support of the charges, after
the charged official has made the statement in his defence, the charged official
should be given a further opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses as well as to
make a supplementary statement after the statement of the witnesses (who are
called in subsequently) have been recorded.

(26) The Inquiry Officer may address the SPE/CBI directly in regard to the production
of their witnesses and need not route such requests through the Vigilance Branch /
Disciplinary Authority.

127
(27) It. is the responsibility of the charged official to present the defence witnesses
before the Inquiry Officer. In cases where the Enquiry Officer is requested to
address the defence witnesses who are Railway employees, he may issue a letter
to this effect, but this will not have the force of summons. The onus of production
of witnesses, who are Railway employees will, however, be on the charged
official.

(28) It is within the discretion and competence of the Inquiry Committee / Inquiry
Officer to refuse / call any witness or to disallow any statement or questions
which are, in their / his opinion, objectionable or irrelevant. The fact of such
refusal and the reasons therefor must, however, be recorded.

(29) De-novo enq uiry should not be held if the Inquiry Officer’s findings are not
acceptable to the Disciplinary Authority. Such a step, if taken, would be
inconsistent with the Discipline and Appeal Rules as the rules do not provide for
such de-novo enquiry. In such circumstances, the Disciplinary Authority is
required to follow the provisions contained in Rule 10(1) &( 2) of RS (D&A)
Rules.

(30) The Inquiry Officers should also consult the Vigilance Manual, Volume I,
Chapter on “Disciplinary Proceedings” and the “Vigilance Hand Book” published
by the Central Vigilance Commission from time to time for clarification regarding
any doubt. While consulting the manual published by the Central Vigilance
Commission, it may be borne in mind that the procedure mentioned therein are
applicable in Central Civil Services but the spirit of the rules / regulations
mentioned therein are applicable in Railway cases also, particularly regarding the
role and functions of the Inquiry Officer in conducting disciplinary proceedings.

128