Only Chief Secretary/ Administrative Reforms Dept Can Direct Joint Inquiry Against Delinquents From Different Departments: Rajasthan HC

In a case where two officers governed by two different departments and disciplinary authorities are booked by only one taking disciplinary action, the Jodhpur bench of the Rajasthan High Court said that in such a case only the Chief Secretary/competent authority of Administrative Reforms and Coordination Department can direct a joint inquiry under the relevant rules. For context, Rule 18 of Rajasthan Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules (CCA Rules) provides for a joint inquiry–where two or more Government Servants are concerned in any case, the Government or any other authority competent to impose the penalty of dismissal from service on all such Government Servants may make an order directing that disciplinary action against all of them may be taken in a common proceedings. The petitioner–an Accounts Officer in the Public Works Department whose appointing authority is the Secretary Finance Department, had challenged the issuance of charge sheet by the Department of Personnel against him. The charge sheet was also filed against another person who was working as the Development Officer, and whose disciplinary authority is Department of Personnel. The charges pertained to financial and other irregularities committed in Panchayat Samiti, Rajgarh (Churu), in which, at the relevant time, the petitioner, an Assistant Accounts Officer and Amarjeet Singh, a Development Officer were working in harness.It was the petitioner's case that his disciplinary authority was Department of Finance, and since the Department of Personnel was neither the appointing authority nor the petitioner's disciplinary authority, it could not have initiated the disciplinary proceedings against him.After considering the case Justice Dinesh Mehta said that "Direct answer to the question-which is the authority competent to pass such order under Rule 18 of the CCA Rules, 1958 is not available under the CCA Rules, 1958. However, as per the Rajasthan Rules of Business, the department of Administrative Reforms and Coordination, headed by the Chief Secretary of the State is entrusted with the task of coordinating with other administrative departments. In the cases like the one in hands, when two delinquents whose disciplinary authorities are officers or Secretaries of different departments, then, it is the Chief Secretary or other competatnt authority of the Administrative Reforms and Coordination Department alone, who can pass an order under Rule 18 of CCA Rules, 1958"The court further hastened to add that the manner in which the "simple chargesheet" was issued in the present case was not sufficient. It said that the competent authority in the Department of Administrative Reforms and Coordination could either undertake the proceedings itself or could pass an order specifying the authority which shall function as a disciplinary authority for the common proceedings of all delinquents."It is only after such an order being passed, an authority appointed as disciplinary authority can proceed in the matter and issue a combined charge-sheet to all such delinquents who are involved in one case or common and interlaced irregularities, against whom the State proposes to take common or joint proceedings," the court explained. The State relying on Rule 18 argued that Department of Personnel was justified in initiating disciplinary proceedings and serving charge-sheet upon the petitioner. After hearing the contentions, the question for consideration before the Court was that who shall be the authority competent to pass order under Rule 18. Since there was no direct answer to this question under Rule 18, the court referred to Rajasthan Rules of Business (“Business Rules”) and said:“According to Rule 21 of the Rajasthan Rules of Business, disposal of business relating to items common to all departments is to be made in the manner specified in the Appendix-B. All decisions relating to services, including disciplinary matters, suspension and institution of disciplinary proceedings are required to be undertaken by the Deputy Secretary or the Secretary, as the case may be, of the concerned department. As such, in the case of the petitioner whose parent department is Finance Department, the disciplinary action (if any) can be taken by the Secretary of the Finance Department and not by the Department of Personnel.”In view of the discussion the court quashed the chargesheet against the petitioner. It further said that the petitioner's disciplinary authority in the Finance Department shall be free to recommend disciplinary proceedings against the petitioner (if not already done) or the Chief Secretary or the Secretary in-charge of the Administrative Reforms and Co-ordination Department shall suo-motu pass an order under Rule 18 of the CCA Rules, 1958, appointing common disciplinary authority (if so desired). Case Title: Tulcha Ram v the State of Rajasthan & Ors.Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (Raj) 31Click Here To Read/Download Order

Only Chief Secretary/ Administrative Reforms Dept Can Direct Joint Inquiry Against Delinquents From Different Departments: Rajasthan HC

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Only Chief Secretary/ Administrative Reforms Dept Can Direct Joint Inquiry Against Delinquents From Different Departments: Rajasthan HC

Nupur Agrawal

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers