Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UNION OF INDIA
VERSUS
MOHD RAMZAN KHAN
DECIDED ON: November 20, 1990
Constitution of India – Article 14 and 311 – Government of India Act of 1935 – Section 240 – Central Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules – Falls for determination in this bunch of appeals is as to whether with alteration of provisions of Forty-second Amendment of Constitution doing away with opportunity of showing cause against proposed punishment delinquent has lost his right to be entitled to a copy of report of enquiry in disciplinary proceedings – Court on that occasion also noticed judgments of Privy Council in cases of R. Venkata Rao v. Secretary of State for India and judgment of Federal Court in Secretary of State for India and summed up meaning of reasonable opportunity reasonable opportunity envisaged by provision consideration includes an opportunity to deny his guilt and establish his innocence which he can only do if he is told what charges levelled against him are and allegations on which such charges are based – Held, High Courts which, following Forty-Second Amendment, have taken view that it is no longer necessary to furnish a copy of inquiry report to delinquent officers Even on some occasions this Court has taken that Since we have reached a different conclusion judgments in different High Courts taking contrary view must be taken to be no longer laying down good law – We have not been shown any decision of a coordinate or a larger Bench of this Court taking this conclusion to the contrary reached by any two-Judge Bench in this Court will also no longer be taken to be laying down good law but this shall have prospective application and no punishment imposed shall be open to challenge on this ground – Inquiry Officer and he has furnished a report to disciplinary authority at conclusion of inquiry holding delinquent guilty of all or any of charges with proposal for any particular punishment or not, the delinquent is entitled to a copy of such report and will also be entitled to make a representation against and non-furnishing of the report would amount to violation of rules of natural justice and make final order liable – Appeals allowed.
Key Points: - The judgment discusses whether the Forty-Second Amendment changes the requirement to furnish a copy of the inquiry report to the delinquent officer (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) . - It holds that supply of a copy of the inquiry report along with recommendations, if any, is within the rules of natural justice and remains applicable post-amendment (prospective application) (!) (!) (!) . - If there is an Inquiry Officer who furnishes a report to the disciplinary authority, the delinquent is entitled to a copy of that report and the opportunity to make representations (!) (!) . - Non-furnishing of the inquiry report would violate natural justice and render the final order liable to challenge (!) . - The Court set aside disciplinary actions where the report was not supplied, indicating a violation of natural justice in those cases (!) . - The decision clarifies the distinction between inquiries conducted by the disciplinary authority vs. by an Inquiry Officer regarding the need for a report (!) (!) (!) . - The Court cites prior cases on natural justice, including Goel, Bhaishankar Joshi, and Gujarat Teredesai, to establish the entitlement to a copy of the report and opportunity to respond (!) (!) (!) . - The judgment emphasizes that the second stage of Art. 311(2) has been removed, but the delinquent remains entitled to representation against conclusions and to copies of the record when an Inquiry Officer is involved (!) (!) . - The ruling applies to appeals from Union of India vs. Mohammad Ramzan Khan and states that judgments of High Courts adopting the post-42nd amendment view are no longer good law (!) (!) . - The judgment specifies that where a report is furnished with or without proposal of punishment, it constitutes material for the disciplinary authority’s consideration (!) .
JUDGMENT
RANGANATH MISRA, J.
( 1 ) SPECIAL leave ranted in special leave petitions. All the Civil Appeals by special leave are heard together.
( 2 ) THE short point that falls for determination in this bunch of appeals is as to whether with the alteration of the provisions of Art. 311 (2) under the Forty-second Amendment of the Constitution doing away with the opportunity of showing cause against the proposed punishment, the delinquent has lost his right to be entitled to a copy of the report of enquiry in the disciplinary proceedings.
( 3 ) SUB-ART. (2) of Art. 311 in the original Constitution read thus:"no such person as aforesaid shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank until he has been given a reasonable opportunity of showing cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to him;"the effect of this provision came to be considered by a Constitution Bench of this Court in Khem Chand v. Union of India, 1958 SCR 1080: (AIR 1958 SC 300 ). The learned Chief Justice traced the history of the growth of the service jurisprudence relating to security of the civil service in the country beginning from the Government of India Act of 1915 followed by S. 240 of the Government of India Act of 1935. This Court on that occasion also noticed the judgments of the Privy Council in the cases of R. Venkata Rao v. Secretary of State for India, (1937) 64 Ind App 55 : (AIR 1937 PC 31) High Commissioner for India v. 1. M. Lall (1948) 75 Ind App 225 : (AIR 1948 PC 121) and the judgment of the Federal Court in Secretary of State for India v. 1. H. Lall 1945 FCR 103 : (AIR 1945 FC 47), and summed up the meaning of reasonable opportunity thus:"the reasonable opportunity envisaged by the provision under consideration includes - (A) an opportunity to deny his guilt and establish his innocence, which he can only do if he is told what the charges levelled against him are and the allegations on which such charges are based; (B) an opportunity to defend himself by cross-examining the witnesses produced against him and by examining himself or any other witnesses in support of his defence; and finally. (C) an opportunity to make his representation as to why the proposed punishment should not be inflicted on him, which he can only do if the competent authority, after the enquiry is over and after applying his mind to the gravity or otherwise of the charges proved against the government servant tentatively proposed to inflict one of the three punishments and communicates the same to the government servant. "
( 4 ) THE Fifteenth Amendment effective from 6-10-1963 brought about change in Sub-Art (2) which thereafter read as hereunder:"no such person as aforesaid shall be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank except after an enquiry in which he has been informed of the charges against him and given a reasonable opportunity of being heard in respect of those charges and where it is, proposed, after such inquiry, to impose on him any such penalty, until he has been given by a reasonable opportunity of making representation on the penalty proposed, but only on the basis of the evidence adduced during such inquiry. "
( 5 ) AFTER the amendment this Court decided a series of cases wherein it indicated that a failure to furnish a copy of the report of the Inquiry Officer would result in violation of the guarantee of reasonable opportunity State of Maharashtra v. Bhaishankar Avalram Joshi (1969) 3 SCR 917: (AIR 1969 SC 1302); Avtar Singh v. Inspector General 1968 Serv LR 131 (SC ).
( 6 ) A Constitution Bench in Union of India v. H. C. Goel (1964) 4 SCR 718: (AIR 1964 SC 364) proceeded to say"article 311 consists of two sub-articles and their effect is no longer in doubt. The question about the safeguards provided to the public servants in the matter of their dismissal, removal or reduction in rank by the Constitutional provision contained in Art. 311, has been examined by this court on, several occasions. It is now well-settled that a public servant who is
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
