ORDER (By Circulation)

Hon’ble Mr. Rajinder Kashyap, Member (A) :

By way of the present R.A. filed by the Review Applicant (applicant in original lis), seeking review of the order dated 26.11.2025 passed in O.A. No. 504/2015, the relevant portion of the same reads as under: -

“10. With respect to issue (i) framed in para 9 above, i.e., whether the inquiry stood vitiated for want of reasonable opportunity to the applicant on account of (a) shifting the venue to Kaimganj despite his representation dated 19.12.2012 expressing apprehension of insecurity at that place, and (b) conducting the inquiry ex parte on 21.12.2012, we note the scheme of Rule 9 of the Railway Servants (Discipline & Appeal) Rules, 1968.

Rule 9(12) mandates that where the charged official fails to appear, the Inquiry Officer shall direct the Presenting Officer to lead evidence and thereafter adjourn the proceedings to a subsequent date (not exceeding 30 days), while recording an order enabling the delinquent to seek discovery or production of documents within the stipulated period. Rule 9 (21) further requires that, after closure of the prosecution evidence, the Inquiry Officer must question the charged official, if he