Ambika bhardwaj
Published On: January 24, 2022 at 16:42 IST
The Delhi High Court has ruled that even though the Disciplinary Authority lacks the Authority to enact major penalties such as Compulsory Retirement, Dismissal, and Removal, it can introduce Disciplinary Proceedings for imposing the same.
It was acknowledged that nothing suggests that the Appointing Authority would be the only Competent Authority to initiate Disciplinary/major Penalty Proceedings.
The remark was made in reference to CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965.
The Court rejected two Writ Petitions challenging Charge sheets released by the Director (Technical) against Group ‘A’ officers of Indraprastha Power Generation Co. Ltd. .
The Court was asked whether the Director (Technical) or the Director (HR) had the ability to issue charge sheets against Group ‘A’ Officers in a Public Company. The Petitioners were Deputy Manager (Technical) and Senior Manager (Technical), who are Group ‘A’ Officers reporting to the Director (Technical).
“Decrease in pension for three years” and “lowering to a lower stage in the time scale of pay by one stage cumulatively for two years” were the Penalties that were issued.
The Petitions were filed on the basis that the Penalties which were in the category of major penalties of Compulsory Retirement, Removal, and Dismissal and if the Director (HR) was the competent Authority to act in accordance with Rule 11 of the Rules of Service 1965 and the Company’s “Delegation of Powers (DOP).“
The Appointing Authority is specified in Rule 2(a) of the Rules of Service 1965, and the Disciplinary Authority is specified in Rule 2(g).
Rule 13(2) has the power to initiate proceedings against any Government servant.
Rule 13(2) and Rule 11 provide that the Disciplinary Authority may impose “major” and “minor” penalties on Group ‘A’ employee other than Compulsory Retirement, Dismissal and Removal.