Skip to content


August 9, 2011

Master  Circular On important  points  to be  kept  in view  while  imposing penalty,  considering  Appeal,  Revision  and  Review Petitions  in Disciplinary  Cases
No: E(D&A) 200i RG  6-3
The General  Managers,
All  lndian  Railwavs.  etc.
M.C.No.  : 67
New Delhi. dated  20.10.2002

It  is noticed  that  in many  cases,  the disciplinary  proceedings  get  vitiated  on account
of  failure  to  follow  the prescribed  procedure.  Some of  the common mistakes  which  are
comitted  by  the Disciplinary Appellate /Revisionarv/ Revewing  Authorities and inquiry
Officers have been brought  out in  this brochure  for guidance/information  of all concerned.
This  is an  attempt  to compile  thc gist  of various  rules.  instructions,  etc.,  issued  in  this  regard
from time to  time.  While referring  to  this Circular,  the original letter  referred  to therein
should  be read  for a proper  appreciation  and  in case  of doubt,  the original  letter  should  be
relied  upon  as  authoritv.
Since only  the  important  instructions  on  the subject  have been  included  in  this
Master Circular, some  instructions  might not have  found place  herein.  Instructions  contained
in  circulars not  included  in  the Master Circular. should not  be deemed  to  have been
superseded  simply  because  of their  non-inclusion.
(Inder  Mohan) ‘
Important points  to be  kept  in view  bv  the Disciplinarv/Appellate/
Revisionarv/Reviewing  Authorities and  Inquirv Officers
while  handling disciplinarv  cases
It  is noticed  that  in many  cases,  the disciplinary  proceedings  get  vitiated  on account  of
failure  to follow  the  prescribed  procedure.  Some  of the  common  mistakes  which  are  committed
by  the  Disciplinary/Appellate/Revisionary/Reviewing  Authorities  and  Inquiry Ofiicers  have  been
brought  out  in  this  brochure  for guidance/information  of all concerned.
2.  Disciplinary  Authority:
a) The  chargesheet  should  be  issued  by  the appropriate  Disciplinary  Authority  prescribed  in
the schedules.  It  is also  essential  that the chargesheet  is signed  by the  Disciplinary
Authority himself  and  not  by any  lower  authority  on  his  behalf  .
b)  The provisions  in  Rule 8  have  to  be kept in  view’ while  ascertaining  whether  the
chargesheet  has been  issued  by  the  correct authority.  In  respect  of  non-gazetted
delinquent  staff  a major  penalty  chargesheet  can  be  issued  only by an  authority  who is
competent,  as  per  the schedules,  to impose  on  that Railway  servant  at least  one  of the
major  penalties.  However,  in respect  of delinquent  employee  of gazetted  rank,  a major
penalty  chargesheet  can  also  be  issued  by an authority  who is competent  to impose  on
that  delinquent  employee  atleast  one  of the minor  penalties.
(Rule  8(2)  of RS@&A) Rules.)
c) Disciplinary  Authority  would  be  with reference  to the  post  held  by  the  charged  official at
the  time  of initiation  of disciplinary  action  and  not with  reference  to  the  post  held  by him
at  the  time  the  alleged  misconduct  occurred.
(Board’  s  letter  No  :E(D&A)84/RG6-a2  dt  :  8.  8.  84)
d) While  (a),  (b) and  (c) above  reftr to  the  level  of the  Disciplinary  Authority,  the  Authority
who actually  functions  as  Disciplinary  Authority  can  be none  other  than  the one  under
whose  administrative  control  the  delinquent  employee  works. Also  there  can  be  only  one
Disciplinary  Authority  for an employee,  e.g.  for an operating  staff  who is under  the
administrative  control  of Divisionl Operating  Manager  (DOM), only  the DOM can  act
as Disciplinary  Authority,.even  if  the misconduct  pertains  to violation  of  commercial
rules or  safety  rules and not Divisional Commercial  Manager  or Divisional Safety
(Board’s  letters  No.E(D&A)72RI36-13dt.16.10″73&  E(D&A)94RG6-69  dt.4.8.97)
e)  If the  Disciplinary  Authority  of a   charged  official  is also  involved  in  the  same  case  then  he
should  not act  as  the  Disciplinary  Authority  in the said  case. The  authority  who  is next
higher  in  the  hierarchy  should  act  as  the  Disciplinary  Authority.
(Board’  s  letter  No  :E(D&A)90  RG6-  1  23  dt  :9.  1  1  .  90)

f)  The authority  looking after the current duties of  a post cannot exercise  the disciplinary
functions  assigned  to the said  post.
(Board’s  letter  No. F(E) 60 SAl/l  dt.4.3.63)
g) Authority who has  acted  as  a member  or Chairman  of a Fact Finding Inquiry or Accident
Inquiry  should not act as Disciplinary Authority  because  the Charged  employee  would
apprehend that  the  officer  having  expressed earlier  an  opinion  would  not,  as  a
Disciplinary Authority, depart  from his own earlier finding.  He may not thus get  justice.
However, if  the report does  not indicate a final opinion but only a view, prima facie, he
can act as a Disciplinary Authority.  A member  or chairman  of  the Fact Finding Inquiry
or  Accident  Inquiry  cannot, however act as an  Inquiry  Officer  in  that  case since the
Inquiry Officer  should be an authority who  should not have prejudged  the guilt,  even
provisionally  at an  early  stage.
(Board’s  letter  No.E(D&A)63 RG6-16 dt.23.12.68  read  with letter dt.23.5.69)
Charge Memorandum:
a) The charges  in a charge  memorandum  should  be drawn up in clear and distinct articles  of
charges,  separate  for  each  alleged act of  omission or commission. The charges  should be
specific  and not vague. Where  the charges  are  not entirely separate  and  distinct,  it would
be more appropriate  to combine  the various elements  of the charges  into a single article
of charge  but in which the different elements  are  brought  out clearly.
b) The articles  of charges  and  the statement  of imputation  in support  of the articles  of charges
should not  be  identically worded. While  the  article of  charge should be concise,  the
statement  of imputation should contain  details,  references  etc.  relating  to the charges  and
should generally give  a clearer idea about the  facts and circumstances  relating to  the
alleged  act of commission  or omission. Specific  rule instructions which may have been
violated by the charged  official  should  also  be mentioned  in the statement  of imputation.
c) Where  intention  is to bring out  the gravity  of the charge  in a particular case  due  to the  fact
that punishments  in the past  have  not resulted  in better  conduct  on  the part of the  charged
official, then  the previous  record should  be brought out in the chargesheet  itself to enable
the charged  official  to  defend himself with  reference  to  these  factors also. Otherwise,
Disciplinary Authority  cannot  take into account  the previous misconducts  while  taking a
decision  in regard  to the present  case.
(Board’  s  letter No  :E(D&A)68 RG6-3  7 dt:23  .9.68)
d)  The  list  of  documents  by  which  and the  list  of  witnesses by  whom  the charges are
proposed  to be sustained  should be comprehensive  and drawn up with  due care  taking
into  account the  relevance of  each document/witness  in  establishing  the  articles of
charges,  their availability and  ease  of being produced  during  the inquiry etc.  If  it  is found
after  the  issue  of chargesheet  that additional  documents/witnesses  have  to be added  to the
lists, a suitable  corrigendum  to the charged  memorandum  should  be  issued.
4.  a)  If a  chargesheet  is  found  to be  faulty  due  to any  reason  like  if it has  not  been  issued  by  the
appropriate  Disciplinary  Authority  or if the  charges  require  modification/addition  or if a
*faulty  chargesheet  needs  to be  issued  instead  of a minor  penalty  chargesheet  etc’
the  correct procedure would  be  to cancel  the  chargesheet,  indicating  the  reasons  for such
cancellation  and  stating  categorically   treat  the  cancellation  is without  prejudice  to  the  right
of  the  administration  to  issue  of a  fresh  chargesheet’
(Board’  s  letter  No:E(D&A)93  .f-C5-83  dt:  1  .  I  2.  93  )
b) In cases  where  only minor  charge  sheet  required  to be made  in the articles  of charges  or
when  Annexure   it,  III and  IV  need  to be modified,  instead  of resorting  to cancellation
and  issue  of a  fresh  chargesheet.  a  corigendum  to  the  chargesheet  should  be  issued’  This
aspect  has  to be specifically  kept  in view in cases  where  the employee  is due  to retire
shortly or  has r”tit”d  as, after  retirement,  a  chargesheet  can be  issued only  with
president’s  approval  and  that too only if  the time limit  of  4 years  from the date of incident.  The corigendum  should also be  signed  by  the Disciplinary  Authority  himself.
5.  Copies  of documents  relied  upon should,  as  far as  possible,  be supplied  to the  charged
official along  with  the  charge  memorandum.  If the  charged  official  desires  to inspect  the  original
documents,  this  should  invariably  be  allowed.
6.  The  charge  memorandum  should be  served  in person  on  the  charged  official or sent  to his
address  through-registered  post.  If  the  charged  official is not  traceable  or refuses  to accept  the
charge  memorandum.

copy of  the charge  memorandum  should  be displayed  on the notice
board  of the  charged  officials  last     place  of work  and  also  pasted  on  the door  of his  last  known
residential  address  in  the  presence  of two  witnesses.
7.  If there  is  unqualified  admissicn  of the  charge(s)  by  the  charged  official,  no  inquiry  need
be  ordered  by  the  Disciplinary  Authority,  who  can  straightway  pass  final orders.  If only some  of
the  articles  of  the  charges  are-admitted.  then  an  inquiry  has  to be  ordered  only  in respect  of  those
charges  as  are  not admitted. (Board’s  letter  No.  E(D&A)57  XtG  6-6

E.  Inquiry:
In  terms  of Rule  9(7), 10  days’  time  is  tc be  allowed  to  the  charged  official  for submitting
his  written  statement  of defence.  The rule  also  provides  that  further  time may  be  allowed  by  the
Disciplinary  Authority. However,  a  reminder  sbould  be  sent  immediately  after  the  expiry  of the
time  allowed  so  that even  if  further  :r;rnr’  is allcsred  by  the Disciplinary  Authority,  undue  delay
does  not  take  place  in progressing  to the  next  stage  of the  proceedings.  If even  after  reminders,
no defence  reply  is received  from  thc cha^rged  official, an  inquiry should  be  ordered  immediately
and  an  Inquiry Officer  appointed,  duly  inflorrning  the  charged  official.  A  lot of delay  generally
takes  placi at  this stage,  after  the  issr-re  of chargesheet  and  before  Inquiry officer  is appointed
whiclr,needs  to be minimised.  The appointment  of the  Inquiry Ofiicer is to be done  through  a
formal order  in  the prescnbed  formai duly signed  by the Disciplinary  Authority. The same
procedure  should  also  be  follou.ed  whenever  there  is a change  in the  Inquiry Of;Frcer  and  a new
Inquiry  offrcer  is  to be  appointed.4
9.  If, on  consideration  of the  reply  of the  charged  offrcial  to the major  penalty  chargesheet,
the  Disciplinary  Authority  is of the  view  that  a minor  penalty  is warranted  in  the  case,  the  same
may  be  imposed  without  holding  an  inquiry  under  Rule 11(2)  is not attracted)  and  without
giving  any  further  opportunity  to  the  C.O.  for being  heard.
In case  the Disciplinary  Authority  decides  to drop  the  proceedings  after  considering  the
reply of  the charged  official to  the chargesheet,  an order  to this effect should  be passed  and
communicated  to  the  charged  official. However,  in cases  arising  out  of investigation  by  the  CB[
the CBI should  be  consulted  before  a decision  is  taken  to drop  any  of, or all,  the  charges.  CVC
should  be consulted  where  the disciplinary  proceedings  were  initiated  on  their advice  and  the
disciplinary  authority  proposes  to drop  the  proceedings  altogether,  as  distinct  from dropping  or
reviewing  or modifying  some  charges.
(Board’s  letters  No:E(D&A)66  RG6-16  dt:6.6.66  & EG)&A)81  RG6-28  dt.27.6.81)
10.  Appointment  of lnquiry Officer  is  the  prerogative  of  the  Disciplinary  Authority. In non-
CVC vigilance  cases,  the Vigilance  Organisation  will  leave  the choice  of the Inquiry Officer
completely  with the Disciplinary  Authority  in most  of the  cases.  In some  cases  Vigilance  may
forward  panel  of Inquiry Officer  indicating  the number  of inquiries  pending  with each  one  of
them. The  Disciplinary  Authority  in  that  case  may  choose  one  out  of  the  panel  and  appoint  him
as  Inquiry  Offrcer.
@oard’s  le.tter  No.E(D&A)  2000  RG  6-30  dated  16.5.2001)
11.  The  Inquiry Oflicer should  be  sufiiciently  senior  in rank  to the  charged  ofiicial to ensure
that  the  inquiry  commands  the  confidence  it deserves.  Even  in  respect  of Board  of Enquiry,  each
member  of  the  Board  should  be  senior  in  rank  to  the  charged  official.
(E(D&A)2000  RG 6-24  dt.20.2.200r  RBE 3712001)
However,  the  above  stipulation  does  not apply  to inquiries  c,onducted  by Commissioner
of Departmental  Inquiries  of Central  Vigilance Commission  as  they belong  to  a department
different  from  the  one  to which  the  charged  offrcial  belongs  and  cannot,  therefore,  be  suspected
ofbias.  (Rule  9(3)  ofRS@&A) Rules).
@oard’s  letters  No. E@&A)71  RG 6-4  dt.27.2.71  & E(D&A)2000  RG 6-24  dt.20.2.2001  RBE
12.  After an  inquiry  is ordered  and  an  Inquiry  ofiicer appointed,  a  Presenting  Officer  to present
the  case  in support  of  the  charges  may  be  appointed  by  the  Disciplinary  Authority. Appointment
of a Presenting  Ofiicer is not mandatory  in all cases  and  is generally  done  in complex  cases
especially  those  arising  out  of CBl/Vigilance  investigations.
@oard’s  letters  No.  E@&A)75  RG6-32  dt:23.8.75  & E(D&A)78  RG6-3  &:2A122.1.79)
13.  If  a representation  is made  by the charged  official agaiust  the  Inquiry Officer, alleging
bias  on  his  part,  the  disciplinary  proceedings  should  be  stayed  and  the  representatio4  along  with
the otJrer  relevant material,  should be put  up  to  the  appropriate  Revising Authority  for
considering  the  representation  and  passing  suitable  orders.
(Board’s  letter  No.  E(D&A)70  RG  6-14  (l)  dt. 19.6.74).!4.
Transfer of Changed  Clfllcisl danring  pendency  of discipNinary/criminal  caseg
Non-gaeetted  staff against  whom a disciplinary/cnminill  case  is pending  or is about  tcr
stait.,  shouid not  normaliy be  transfErred  frorn  cne Railway/Division  to  another
Railway/Division  till atter  flnalisation  of  the  disciplinarly’criminal  case.
(Board’  s  letter  No.  E(D&A)65RG6-6  dt.25.3  .67)
In case  the  Charged  Offrcial  is  transferred  after  initiatiorr  of disciplinary  proceedings,  the
disciplinary authority will  be with  reference  to  his  new post  and under whose
administrative  control  he  is working.  The new disciplinary  authority  can  continue  the
proceedings  from  that  stage  onwards  and  pass  the  orders,
(Board’s  letter  No. E(D&A)69  RG6-  I  2 dt.  I  8.  6.69)
Points  to be  kept  in view by  Inquiry Ollicers:
A preliminary  hearing  should  invariably  be  held  first afi,rer  giving  due  notice,  as  specified
ii.,t  Rule  9(11). Forr.nel  nctices  have  tc’be  sent  to all concerned  for all  the  regular  hearings
tccl.  Dtrring  tlie preiirninary  heanng,  the  cirarged  official should  be  asked  b)’the Inquiry
Officer  whe;ther  he  has  receivecl  the  chargesheet,  understood  the  charges  against  him and
rry-hether  he accepts  those  charges.  The charged  official should  also  be asked  if  he has
inspected  the documents  listed  in  the chargesheet,  whether  he wants  some  additionai
docurnents  and  whether  he  wishes  to produce  some  defence  documentVwitnesse$.  If any
of the defence  witnesses  are  not  found  to be  relevant,  ttrTe  Inquiry Offrcer  may  disallow
their  evidence  and  advise  the  charged  official accordinglly.  The  relevance  of any  witness
may  be  considered  by  the  Inquiry  officer  from  the  charged  official’s  point  of view.
@oard’s  letter  No.  E(D&A)70  RG6-5  dt:8.12.70)
If  the C.O,  requests  for production  of additional  documents  during  the  inqulry  and  if  in
the opinion  of the  Inquiry Oflicer, some  or all of the  documents  are  not relevant  to the
case,  then  the  Inquiry  Offrcer  has  to  record  in writing his  reasons  for refusal  to requisition
for production  of such  documentsn  as  provided  in Rule 9(15) of RS  (D&A) Rules  and
advise  the  charged  official about  the  decision.
The  In.quiry  Cifiioer  has  to rnaintain  a Daily Order  She$t  which  is rhe  reoord  of all the
husiness’iransacted  by hirn  on day  to day  basis  of the  conduct  of the  inquiry.  The  faet:;
relating  to nr:tices  sent,  taking  on  record  the  docunnents,  requests/representations  made  b-v
either  pariy  and  the  decisions  of the  Inquiry Officer  rhereorq  and  the  examinatior/cross-
examination  undertaken  should  find a mention  in the  daily order  sheet.  The  daily order
sheets  shouid  be dated  and  signed  by the Inquiry ofiicer and  serially  nurnbered.  The
Daily  Order Sheet  indicates  whether  reasonable  opportunity  has been  given to  the
charged  offrcial,  whether  the  procedure  prescribed  in  the  ruies  has  been  adhererd  to, etc.
In addition  to  the  Daily Order  Sheet,  the  Inquiry Officer  tras  to maintain  the  record  of  the
inquiry  proceedings  in detail. It should  corntain  the  date  of the  proceedings,  the  officials
present,  the  examinatior/cross-examination  of the  witnessies  in  the  form of questions  and
answers  reproduced  verbatim  and  any decision  taken  by the  Inqulry Officer during  the
proceedings  regarding  dropping  of a witness,  allowing/re.iecting  the  requests  of the C.O.
tbr production  of additional  documents,  witnesses  etc. These  should  be signed  by all
present  duringi  the hearing.  Copy of  proceedings  shoultl  be giverr  to  the delinquent
ernployee  at  the  end  ofeach  day’s  proceedings.
The  record  of proceedings  can  either  be  in Hindi or English. Principnes  of natural  justice
require  that  the delinquJnt  ofiicer must  have  reasonable  opportunity-1o.d_ef-end  himself’
ThL  Inquiry Offrcer  should  explain  the  proceedings  to the Charged  Offrcial in a  language
known  to tri*  and  it should  bl  ensured  that he  understands  and  accepts  the same  before
his  signature  is  obtained.
@oard’s  letter  No.  F{D&A) 66  RG6-7  dt.  30.12.68).
During the inquiry, the evidence  on behalf of  the Disciptinary  Aulhority has  to  be
produied  first.  ft would be  incorrect  to examine  the  charged  official  first, as  this would
be against  the principles  of  natural  justice. All  the  tlocuments  listeC  in  the charge
mernorendum  have  to be  taken  on reeord  and  clearly markcd  as  llxhibit No.—  and
signeti  by the  Inquiry OfiFrcer.  Atl the witnesses  listed  in the  charge  memorandum  have
thin  to  be exarnin*.d  ur”  by  oire ir,  the presence  of  the charged  offrcial.  After
exarnination  of  each  prosecution  witness,  the charged  official  has  to  be given the
opportunity  to  cross*examine  the witness.  After cross-examination  of  the prosectltion
wiiness,  the  Inquiry Offrcer  may  put  such  questions  to  the  witness  as  he  thinks  fit. If any
of  the  nitnesses  had  earlier  givin any  statement  during  investigation,  fact  finding  inquiry
etc.,  he  should  be  asked  during  the  inquiry  to confirm  the  said  statemeflt  before  it is  taken
on  record  as  evidence. If the  statement  is quite  comprehensive,  a  rnere  confirmation  o1′
the statement  by  the witness  should  suffice during the  inquiry  instead  of  de novo
examination  of  the witness. The Presenting  officer, if  any,  can also  re-examine  the
prosecution  witness  after  the  cross-examination,  on any  point on wtrrich  the witness  was
Lrorr-.*”*ined  but if  the  re-examinqtion  by the Presenting  Ofticer is on a new point,
then  the permission  of  the Inquiry bfficer  has  to be obtained  for  the same.  If  re-
examinatibn  by  the  Presenting  Offrcer  is allowed  on  any  new matter,  then  an  opportunity
should  be given f,or  further cross-exarnination  of  the utitness  concerned  on such  new
matter.  If’any  of  the  prosecuticn  witnqss  is  to be  dropped  due  to sorne  rea$on,  this  should
be  dc,ne  ciuring  the  proceeilirgs  in  the  presence  of  the  cborgrd  oflficir,t  and  this  fact  shoulcl
also  be  recordecl  forinally  by  the  Inquiry  Officer  in  the  inrlui.ry  prooeedings.
(Rule  9(20)  of RS(D&A)  Rules  & Board’s  lettersNo.  E@&A)70  RG6-14  dt. 15.1.71  and
E(D&A)80  Rff47  dt.  2s.s.81).
Copies  of oral  evidence  recorded  durirrg  the  proceedings  should  be  ;given  to the Chmged
Official  in case  he  asks  for it at  the  end  of each  day’s  sitting  or even  on  the  conclusion  of
inquiry  proceedings.
(Board’s  letter  No.  E(D&A)65  ILG  6-40  dt.  30.7,65).
Where  no Presenting  Oficer  has  been  appointed,  there  should  be no objection  to  the
Inquiry Officer examining  and  cross-examining  the witnesses  as  her  is appointed  to find
ouf  thi  tnrttl in tlie charges  and  such  examinatior/cross-examination  is aimed  at  that end
only. However,  the  Inquiry Officer should  refrain  from searching  cross-examination  as
this might  affect  his  rcle as  irnpartial  authority.
@oa^rd’s  letters No.E{D&A)70 RG6-41 dt.?O  10.’/1 &  E(D&ra.)2000  RG5-60 dt.
If  the report of hand-writing expet  is reiied upon as evidence  in  the inquiry  and if  the
charged official  makes a  specific request  for  summoning  the hand-writing  expert for
cross-examination,  then  it would be obligatory on the part of Inquiry Offrcer to summon
the hand-writing expert  for appearing  in the  inquiry.
(Board’s  letter  No. E(D&A)  66 RG6-24 dt, 13.2.67)
After  the case on behalf of  the Disciplina.ry Authority  is  closed,  the charged official
should be given the opportunity to  present  his detbnce.  The Charged Official,  if  he so
desires, should  be  allowed  to  examine  iiimselfl  in  his  own  behalf.  The  defence
documents,  if  any,  would then be  taken  on re’;ord and  defence  witnesses,  if any, would be
examined/cro  ss-examined.
It  is not obligatory for the Inquiry Offrcer to send  summons  to all the defence  witnesses
cited by  the  charge offrcial.  If  the  inquir-v-  Officer  is  of  the view  that  the evidence
purported  to be given by a witness w;ll  be irrelevant to  the charge  against  the charged
official  and  failure  to  secure rhe attendance  of  the witness would  not  prejudice the
defence,  the  Inquiry  Officer  may  reject  the request  for  summoning that witness duly
recording the  reasons  therefor.  In  the case  of  outside witnesses  cited by  the charged
official,  the responsibility  is on him to ensure  his presence  during the inquiry.  However,
all those  defence  witnesses  who have  been  allowed by the  Inquiry Offrcer and who have
come  to give  the evidence,  have  to be examined.
{Board’s  letterNo. E(D&A)70 RG6-5 dt.  S.l2.7O  and  Rule 9(2)of RS(D&A)Rules}
At  the  end, the  Inquiry  Ofiicer  may  generally question the  charged offrcial  on  the
circumstances  appearing  against  him in the evidence  produced,  to enable  him to put forth
his explanation. Such  questioning  cf the charged  offrcial by the  Inquiry Offrcer would be
mandatory  if the charged  official has  not examined  himself as  a witness  and  failure on  the
part of Inquiry Oflicer  to do  this would am{runt  to denial of reasonable  opportunity.
ofRS@&A)  Rules]
After  the  production  of  evidence is  completed, the  Inquiry  Offrcer  4g3g allow  the
Presenting  Offrcer and  the charged  official  to file written briefs as a final presentation  of
their respective  cases. This  again  is not mandatory  in all cases  but if  it  is allowed, the
Presenting  Offrcer’s brief should  be obtained  first and  a copy given  to the charged  official
to  enable  him  to  present  his defence  brief  However,  if  the  inquiry  has been held ex-
partq there  is no need  to give an opportunity  t.e  the charged  official  to file a written brief
(Board’s  letters  No E(D&A)69 ILG6-2C  Ct.18.6.69  and  E@&A)86 RG6-42  dt: 9.5.86.
Ifthe  charged  official does  not eppear  before  the  Inquiry Ofticer, the inquiry may be held
ex-parte. However, a copy of the  record of the day-to-day  proceedings  ofthe  inquiry and
notices  for the hearings  should  be sent  to the charged  official  regularly so  that he  is aware
of  what  has transpired during  the  proceedings  and this  also enables  him  to  join  the
proceedings  at  any stage,  if  he so desires.  This  procedure should be complied with
invariably  and  Inquiry  Oflicer  should ensure  that  full  opportunity  is  provided  to  the
charged  official  to defend  himself
@oard’s  letter  No. E(D&A)  90 RG 6-34  dt. 18.4.90).8
l)  The  minimum  time  to be  given  to the  charged  ofticial  for various  purposes  like replying
to the chargesheet,  examination  of documents  etc.,  as  specified  in various  sub-rules  of
Rule  9,  should  be  adhered  to strictly.
m) A model  time-schedule  of 150  days  has  been  laid down  for finalisation  of a disciplinary
case,  whiih  also  specifies  the  time within which  the different  stages  in the disciplinary
proceedings  should  be  cornpleted.  With  the  introduction  of the  procedure  of furnishing  a
copy  of the  Inquiry  report  to the charged  official allowing  him to represent  against  the
same  before  a  final decision  is  taken  by  the  Disciplinary  Authority,  an  additional  time of
about  two months  has  been  added  to  the  rnodel  time-schedule.  However,  the model  time
schedule  is not mandatory  but  has  been  prescribed  only  as  a  guideline  so  that  disciplinary
cases  are  finalised  expeditiously.
@oard’s  letter  No.E(D&A)86  RG  6-41  dt 3.4.86  & E(D&A)90  RG  6-18  dt.  9.2.90).
n)  While conducting  the inquiry,  the Inquiry officer should  ensure  that  the principles  of
natural  justice are  not violated  and  there  is no denial  of  reasonable  opportunity  to the
charged  ofiicial  in defending  himself.
(Board’s  letter  No.E-55  RG6-20  dt:4.2.56)
o)  If the  Inquiry Officer  ceases  to function  as  the  Inquiring  authority  in a  case  after  hearing
and  recording  whole  or part  of  the  evidence  ::nd  o new  Inquiry  ofiicer  is appointed  in the
case,  then  the succeeding  Inquiry Officer m”ry  act  cn the evidence  already  recorded  by
the predecessor,  in  full  or  part and also call  for  further examination  as considered
necessary.  It is not  necessary  that  the  successsr  should  hold  the  inquiry  de-novo.
(Rule  9(24)  ofRS(D&A) Rules)
p)  The  inquiry  report  should  be  prepared  in accordance  with Rule  9  (25).  It should  contain  a
detailed  analysis  of  the  evidence  taken  on  record  during  the  inquiry  with actual  references
to  the depositions  of  the witnesses  and the charged  offrcial and also documentary
evidence.  The  findings in  respect  of  each artir:le of  charge  should be  clear and
categorical.  If  a charge  is held as  partly proved,  the  findings  should  clearly  state  the
extent  to which  the  said  charge  is established  with cogent  reasons  therefor.  It should  be
ensured  that  the  inquiry  report  is based  on detailed  analysis  of the  evidence  and  findings
in regard  to  the  charge(s)  are  unambiguous.
q) The  Inquiry Officer  should  normally  comple:le  inquiry  within a  period  of six months  from
the  date  of his appointment  as  such  and  submit  his  report.  In the  preliminary  inquiry he
should  lay down  a definite  time  bound  programme  for insprection  of documents  etc.  The
regular  hearing,  once  started,  should  be conducted  on day  to day  basis. Adjournments
should  not  be  granted  on  frivolous  grounds.
@oard’s  lener  No.  E(D&A)85  RG  6-21  dt:  30.5.1985)9
16.  Action  on  Inquiry Report:
a)  When  the  Inquiry Offrcer  submits  the  Inquiry Report,  the  Disciplinary  Authority  should
first go thrdgh  the report and  the inquiry proceedings  to ascertain  if  the prescribed
procedure  has  been  followed  and  the  inquiry  report  has  been  framed  in accordance  with
itule 9(25). If any  irregrrlarity  is noticedbyihe Uisciplinary  Authority,  the  case  needs  to
be remitted  back  to the Inquiry Offrcer for  further inquiry from the stage  at which the
lacuna  has  been  detected  or for rewriting  the  Inquiry Report,  as  the case  may  be.  The
case  should  however  not  be  remitted  to  the  Inqury Offrcer  for rewriting  the  report  merely
on  the grounds  that  the Disciplinary  Authority  does  not agree  with the  findings  of the
Inquiry  offrcer.
b)  The Disciptrinary  Authority can also himself  recall  the witnesses  and examine,  cross-
examine  and  re-examine  them,  if  it  is necessary  in the interests  of .justice. However,
where  this  is done,  the  examinatiorq  etc.  of the  witnesses  should  be  done  in the  presence
of  the Charged  Official, who  can take the help of  his defence  helper also.  The
disciplinary  authority  can  also  arange  the  presence  of Presenting  Officer,  if any,  at such
examination  to ensure  the  interests  ofthe prosecution.
(Board’s  letter  No.  E(D&A)  70  RG6-59  dt.21.4.71)
c)  Once  the  Disciplinary  Authority  is satisfied  that  the  inquiry  has  been  held  in accordance
with  the  rules  and  the  Inquiry  Report  has  also  been  prepared  properly,  he  should  consider
the  case  and  a:rive  at a  tentative  decision  in regard  to establishment  of  the  charges.  If he
is  in agreement  with  the  Inquiry  Offrcer  in regard  to  the  findings  of the  chargeg  detailed
views  need  not be  recorded  by  the Disciplinary  Authority  at  this stage.  However,  if  the
Inquiry ofiEcer  has held  the charge(s)  as not proved  and  the Disciplinary Authority
disagrees  with  the  Inqury Offrcer  in  this  regard,  then  detailed  reasons  for dis-agreement
have  to be  recorded  by  the  Disciplinary  Authority.  In either  case,  this  constitutes  only  the
tentative  views  ofthe Disciplinary  Authority  and  not  his  final  views  and  hence,  recording
of  these  views  should  be  worded  carefully.  Thus,  an  initial scrutiny  of  the  Inquiry Report
by  the  Disciplinary  Authority  must  invariably  be  done  before  the  Inquiry  Report  is sent  to
the  charged  official.
(Rule  l0 ofRS(D&A) Rules  and  Board’s  lefferNo.E(D&A)87  RG6-151  dt.4.4.96)
d)  The  Inquiry Report  should  then  be  sent  to the  charged  official alongwith  the  reasons  for
disagreement,  if any,  with  the  Inquury  officer  in  regard  to any  or all ofthe cha^rges,  asking
for  his  representation  against  the  findings of  the  Inquiry Ofiicer  anC  reasons  of
disagreement,  if any.  This  should  be  done  even  in cases  of ex-parte  inquiry.  The  Report
should  be  given  to  the  C.O.  even  if he  is  held  not  guilty.
(Rule  l0 of RS(D&A)  Rules  and  Board’s  letterNo.E@&A)87  RG6-l5l  dt.4.4.96)
e)  On  receipt  of  the  representation  of the  charged  officer,  the  Disciplinary  Authority  should
consider  the inquiry report,  the inquiry proceedings,  the representation  of the charged
offficial,  defence  brief  and  Presenting  Offrcer’s  brief and  then  arrive  at a  final decision  in
regard  to each  of the  charges  and  also  decide  the penalty  which would be warranted  in
that  case.  ln cases  where  disciptinary  proceedings  have  been  initiated  on  the  advice  of  thel0
Central  Vigilance Commission,  the Disciplinaq,v  Authority should  first  record  only a
provisional  decision  since  such  cases  have  to be  dnalised  oniy  in consultation  with CVC.
(D  In non-CVC  vigilance  cases,  if  in a case  Vigilance  has  recommended  a major
penalty  and  the  Disciplinary  Authority  proposes  to exonerate  or impose  a minor  penaliy,
he  should  first  record  his  provisional  order  and  then  consult  Vigilanie Organization  onr!.
If after  such  consultatiorg  the  Disciplinary  Authority  is not  in-agreqroi  with the  views
of tJre  Vigilance,  he is free  to pass  finil  orders  a-bout  the peialty.  The Disciplinary
Authority shoulti  ensure  that copy of  the Notice Imposing  penalty  (NIp)  is  ient  to
Vigilance  promptly’  Vigilance  Organization  may,  if they  so  c6nsider,  r*”t  revision  ofthe
penalty  by  the  appropriate  authoriry.
(ii)  Likewise,.  *_!:t:  Disciplinary Authority  has  imposed a  major  penalty in
agreement  with the  Vigilance  but  the Appellate/Revisionary  Authority,  on consideration
of Appeal/Revision  or otherwise,  proposCs  to exonerate  or reduce  the  penalty  to a minor
one,  he  will consult  the  Vigilance  Organi  zatian  once. After such  consultatiorq  he  will be
free  to  take  a  final  decision.
(Board’s  lefier  No.E(D&A)  2000  RG  6-30  dated  16.5.2001).
(iiil  The  procedure  laid  down  in sub-paras  (i) and  (ii) above  should  also  be  followed  in
those  cases  also where  the Vigilance  has  tJoto**naed  imposition  of  a
genalty”,  namely  compulsory retirement/removaVdismissai  from  service but  the
Disciplinary/Appellate/Revisionary  Authority,  as  the  case  may  be,  wishes  to disagree  and
proposes  to  impose  any  of  the  other  major  penalties.
(Board’s  letter  No.E(D&A)2000  RG  6_30  dt.  Z3.9.Z00Z)
g)  If  the Disciplinary Authority proposes  to  impose  a  specific penalty but  is  not
competent  to impose  the same,  then  he should  pui up the hle, witi  tris ui”*r,  to the
appropriate  higher  authority  who is competent  io  impose  the proposed  penalty  for a suitable  decision  on  the matter. Special  care is  required  in  irris  connection  before
imposing  the  penalty of  compulsory  retiremen! removal or  dismissal  since  these penalties  cannot  be  imposed  by an  authority  lower  in rank  than  the  nppointing  Authority.
h)  The final  views-cf  the Disciplinary  Authority/AppellatelRevisionary  Authority, once recorded  on  the  file’ are  to be  treated  as  the  final decision  and  cannot  be  altered  either  by him or by his  successor.  Id after  recording  the  final a*iision *  ,i*  hi;  iie  nisciplinary
or Appellate  or Revisionary  Authority  relinquishes  charge  of his post  6efore  the orders
are @mmunicated,  then  his successor  cannot  consider  th1 merits  or tnr case  afresh  and arrive  at  an  independent  decision  but  can  only  communicate  the  orders  of his  predecessor.
In such  a case,  the orders  would clearly  iniicate that he  is merely  communicating  the decision  already  taken  by  the  earlier  oisciplinary/Appellate/Rwisi”;ny A;hority.
(Board’s  letrer  No.E(D&A)97  RG  6-72  dated  2s.05.2001)
i)  The  final orders  of.the Disciplinary/Appellate  Authority  have  to be  reasoned,  speaking and  should  cover  all  the  important  points  relating  to  the  disciplinary  rur”.  It should  also indicate  that  the  representation  of  the  charged  odcial  has  been  coniidered  and  if possiblell
certain  points  raised  in the  representation  should  also  be  commented  upon,  in brief’
order  of the  siseiplinarf  iApl:ellate  a”iuo*ty  should  clearly  indicate  rf{  he  has  applied
his mind  to the  case  and  it should  withstaxrt  judicial scnrtiny. Plfed  forrns  should  nct
be used  by the Disciplinar.vlAppeliate/Reu,uio,uury
Autttority  while passing  orders  in a
p1G5;22  dt:.  Zt.z.mand E(D&A)2002
p1ci6-27  dt.  24.9.2002)
j)  There  is no provision  for sending  a notice
thlcharged ofiicial
the proposcd
penalty  before  the sarne  is imposJd. A provision  for a Show  Cause  Notice at  this stage
was  in force  earlier  but has  been  discontinued  since  1978′ The Disciplinary  Authority
should therefore record his  final  views  indicating  the  penalty
io  !t
imposed and
communicate  the same  to the ot”tgtd  official  immediately  ther91ft9r There  is also no
provision for  giving  a  personal  f[*ing  to  the  charged  ofticial  by  the Disciplinary
Disciplinary  Authorit-r:  es  free  to consult  arry  other  authority  before  der:iding  about
his  findings  on  the  charges.  Ho*eoer,  once  tre  ,tdoptt  arry  views/comlnelts  expresseci  by
some  other  authority,  sich views becorne  those  ofitre  Disciplinary-  Authority and  in the
final order, ,*”ra.o  by  the Disciplinary Authority  there should
no reference  to
consultation  with some  other  authority  inctuoing  consultation  with vigilanee’  cvc  etc”
which may give an indlcation  that the Discipfinu.v Arrthority has been  inrfluenced  by
some  other  Authority. However,  where  the  rules  pto”ia*  for consultation  with UPSC’  the
same  has  t”  b;;;At  out cleariy  in the  spealing  orders  of  the  Disciplinary Authority’
l)  The  Disciplinary Authority should  not  take  into account  previous  bad  record punishment
etc.  while determining  the-penalty  to be  irrposed  unless  the  chargesheet  mentions  the  past
record  utro  ,o  tf,”t tile ctrarged’official,  *trit*  defendirrg  himself  with  reference  to the
charges  in the present  case,  has  an opportunity  to  state  his case  with  regarrl  to the past
record  also,  ifhe so  desires.
(Board’s  letter  No.  E(D&A)68  RG6-37  dt:23’9’68)
m) T’,he  t-rnai  grciers  passed  in the disuiplinnry  case  should  be signed  by the Disciplinary
Ai.rthnrity  hirnself  and not on his tehalf  T’he  orders  should  also  clearly  indicate  the
channei  ol: appeal  avaiiable  to  the charged  official  the arrthority  to whorn  the appeal
shoulqi  Ue  ,rraAb  and  the  time  limit within which  the  appeai  should  be made’
undcr  Rule  14:
a)  If  an employee  is convicted  in  a court of  [aw, then  the Disciplinary Authority can
consider  the  conduct  of the ernployee  which  led  to his conviction  and’  after  grring the
Railway  Servant  an  opportunity  tomake a  repleseltation  on  the  penalty  proposed’  pass
necessary  orders  imposing  a suitable  p”no!v,  if  wuranted, in  terms of  provisions
contained  in Rule  r+d).  f  tire  offence  wtriitr led  to  the  conviction  is  of a  grave  nature  and
involves moral  torpitod., which is likely  to render  fuither retention  of the ernployee  in
se,rvice  undesirabli  then  he  should  be  dismissed/removedlcompulsorily
retired’ In other
cases,  the  competent  authority  can  impose  any  ofthe lesser  penalties’  as’warranted  by  the
circumstances  of  the  case.  There  is no  need  fsr holding  an  inquiry  or even  independentlyt2
assessing  the evidence  produced  in tlie couri of lan’.  However,  trefore  such  orders  a:re
passed,  the UPSC  should  be  consulted’*here  such  consultation  is necessary.  The  orders
of ttre  Disciplinary  Authority  should  be  passed  immediately  after  receipt  of intimation  of
the conviction  and need not wait  for  disposal  of  any appeal  which  the convicted
employee  rnal_!1ve  filed  in a higher  court  of law.  If the  higher  court  of  larv  suspends  the
sentence,  it will have  no effect  on  the  penalty  imposed  by  the  depmtment  so  long  as  the
conviction  remains  in force.  If however,  the  conviction  is set  asidl on  appeal,  the-penalty
. imposed  on  the  basis  ofthe conviction  has  to be  revolred
(Board’s  letters  No.  E@&A) 63  RG6-49  dt.  I  l. tt.63,E(D&A)76  R.G6-4  dt:4.3.76&  No:
E(D&A)93  RG6-65  dt:  0.0.s+;
b)  If an  employee  is convicted  but  is  released  under  section  4 of the  Probation  of Offenders
Act,  it is  not  to be  treated  as  acquittal.  Release  under  the  said  Act is ordered  by Courts  on
consideration  offactors  like age,  nature  ofoffence,  assurance  ofgood conduct  etc.  but  the
conviction  is not set aside.  Hence,  action  under Rule 14(i) is justified even  if  the
employee  is  released  under  the  said  Act.
(Board’s  ietter  No:850  RG6-f dt:v.7.s2  & File  No.  E(D&A)85  RG6-5E)
c) The  provision  in nylg  la(ii)  for dispensing  with  the  inquiry  and  imposition  of the  penalty
straightaway  should  be  used  with abundant  caution  *a  onty  where  the  circumstances  are
such  that it  is not reasonably  practicable  to  hold the inquiry.  T’he  decision  of  the
Disciplinary  Authority  in this  regard  cannot  be a subjective  detision  but should  be one
based  on  objective  faqs  supported  by  independent  material.  Written and signe6
statements  must  invariably  be obtained  from the witnesses  concerned  indicating  iheir
knowledge  of
delinquency  on  the part of the delinquent  employee.  befbre
invoking  Rule  la(ii), the  DisciplinaryAuthority  should  make  anobjective  assessment  of
the  situation,  collect.necessary  material  in this connection  and,recol.d  in writing detaile4
reasons  as  to why  it is not  possible  to hold  the  inquiry. The  circumsitan.”r  quoi”d  by  the
Disciplinary  Authorify  should  actually  subsist  at thai  time and  shou.ld  not bL  anticiiatert
ones.  The recorded  decision  of  the Disciplinary Authority  in  this  respect  shoulcl
withstand  .judicial  scrutiny.
(Board’s  letters  No. Ep&A)s5  RG6-72  dt.6.2.g6,  16.5,s6,  6.10.8g  and  i4.10.8g,
E(D&A)  E6llc  5-74  itt.13.4.BT  and  E(D&A)g?  RG6-4s  ct:6.4.92\
d)  Rule 14(ii) should  not be  invoked  in cases  of unauthorised  absence.  In  such  cases’
inquiry  should  not  be  dispensed  with but  should  be  held,  even  ex-parl.e,  if necessary.
(Board’  s  I  efrer  IrIo.  E(D&A)90  RG6-34  dt  :  1  g.  4.  90)
c)  In case  the Disciplinary  Authority  proposss  to invoke  Itule  l4(ii),  he does  not have  to
issue  formal  Charge  Sheet  because  the  departmental  inquiry  has  not.t,c  be  conducted.
(Board’s  letter  No.E(D&A)85  RG6-72  dated  16.5.19g6,)13
18.  Departmental proceedings  and Criminal  Proceedings:
There is no bar to  initiation  ancl  conclusion of  departmental-.action  simultaneous  with
,ri*i;ui’ir;;;i;gr  on  the  same/similar  charges.  fn”  ingredients-  of  misconduct  for
departmental  proceedings  would be different from ihose of the offence with which the person  is
charged  in the criminal proceedings. The standard  of proof required an{  the nature  of evidence
admitted are  also different  in  the  two  prcceedings.  The  dipartmental  proceedings should
continue  independently  unless  they ar* J*y”,r  by a c*,:urt  of law.
stay  orders  can  be granted
by courts on consideration  of an application  egitre charged  o{Iicial that disclosure  of his defence
in the departmental  proceedirrg,  *futa  serior:sly  pre.ludice  his case  in the criminal proceedings’
(Ref:  Supreme Court’s  judgernents  in  the case of  Jang Bahadur Singh Vs’Baij  Nath  Tiwari
(196e(l)SCR  t:+),  xush”rl*u,  Dubey  Vs  tsharat  ao.l(jn*  Coaf  Ltd.-  (tl  le88 Sup’Court
ztlt),orders  of  a  3  judge  bench  (1gg7  (z)  SCC  699)  and  Board’s  letterNo:E(D&A)  71  RG6-36
However,  if the  facts,  circumstances  and  the  charges  in the  departmental  proceedilgs
exactly  identical  to those  in the criminal  case  and  the employee  is exoneratedacquitted  in the
criminal  case  on merits  (without benefit  of doubt  or on  technical  grounds),  then  the  departmental
case  may  be reviewed  if  the employe ooncerned  makes  a representation-in  this regard’ The
revir  v will obviously  be  done  bylhe authority  who  passed  the  orders  in  the  last’
(Board’s  letter  No.E(D&A) 95  RG 6-4  d1.t  ‘6 95)
19.  Appeal:
a)  An Appeal  has  to be preferred  within 45 days  from the date  of delivery  of the order

upp”ui.A against.  However,  the Appointing Authority can condone  the delay and
entertain  an”lppeal  even  aftei  expry’oittre time  limit ifthe Authority  is satisfied  that  the
Appellant  had  zufticient  cause  for not  preferring  the  Appeal  in  tirne-
(Rule  20  of RS@&A) Rules)
b)  The  form and  contents  of an  Appeal  have  been  prescribed  in Rule  21  of RS@&A) Rules,
in terms  of whiclU  it should  be  iomplete,  contain  all  the material  on which  the  appellant
relies,  shall  not contain  any  disrespicful  or improper  language,  etc.  If  these  conditions
are  not met  but  the case  otherwise  has  merit,  then  it would be more  appropriate  to direct
the  appellant  to submit  a prop€r  appeal  rather  than  rejecting  it on  these  grounds  alone.
(Board’s  leuerNo.E@&A)86  RG6-l  I dt.  I7.4.86).
c)  Appellate  Authorities  have  been  specifically  indicated  in  Schedules-I  and  ltr.  With –
t”garO  to Schedule-Il,  the Appellati Authority would be  the authority  appearing  in the
column  next  to  the  one  which  imposes  the  penalty  as  clarified  in Note-l below  Schedule-
U.  In  respect  of ADRM and
pnU  who have  concurrent  powers  in Schedule  II  and
similarly in respect  of AGM and GM who also  have  concurrent  powers,  DRM and GM
cannot  act as Appellate  Authorities  against  disciplinary  orders  passed  by ADRM and
AGM, respectiv;ly.  In the  case  of imposition  of a penalty  by the Revising  Authority.or
enhancement  ofthe penalty  by  the  AppellatelRevising  Authority,  the  Appellate  Authorityt4
would be the authority immediately superior  to  the authority which  rnade  the order
aPPealed  against’
(Rule  1  9(1)  of RS@&A)Rules
and  File  No’E(D&A)e6
AF  I  0-  1  9)’
d)  The  Appellate  Authority  has  to consider  three  main  aspects  viz’
i)  whether  the  procedure  was  folrowed  correctly  antl  there  has  been  no  failure  ofjustice;
ii\  Whether  the Disciplinary
Authffi;s  fi:idings  tot’-U**J  on the evidence  taken  on
record  during  the  inquiry;  and..
:—^.r  ic  nnffir’r€llsurete  to  the  gravity  of offence’
iii) Whether  il”;;;i’
oip”nuttv irnposed  is comme
After considering  the  above  points  the  case  should,  if,  necessary,  be  remitted  back  to the
Disciprinary  a”?r,”*v with directffi;l#;;  {
A-uthoriiy  should  pass
reasoned,  ,  oido’  *’f,:*;;:,”,,hu’.in*.::fi&
clr  setting  aside  the  penalty.
The  orders  orit”-eppelrate
u” *ign*iiyir,*
u”trt”Ity himself  and  not
on  his  behalf’
e)  The  Appellate  Authority  9loulf
give  high  gfgritv
to disposal  of Appeal  and’  as  far as
possible,  *  epffii;;id;;;d;;J
oT*itnin  one  month’
71  RG  6’22 dt’Ll’6’71)
llX”ilff  T:’d11ffi;$,*i””‘r’ff”‘Tff#”i””i’ru;ii””Cn”‘t’o’itvand
enhanced  p”J’v  is  such  ‘t’u’  nioi”l  ;i;l  ty:l1iJll’if,i’T””llil’tl  i:it”t”1l;
Authority  *”ti’ittai  hold  tfre inquiry  first’ o1Lu;”,
i, *”v  a””*  rit
thereafter  o”ir'”  iatit  ortnut  inquiry  pass  such  ordei
under  Rule  22(2)  of RS  (D&A) Rulus’)
Authority  in  cases  of  cerrain  p*nuiri”r.  In  thar.”r.  iiJooeJ{1i”‘horitv
mav  grant  the
same  at  it.  oi,,i”tion  u*in[‘ui’  d;
another  rqilwav  servant  or traq
-p””if*a  in  that  regard  to assist  him’
(Rule  Z4(1)of  RS(D&A) Rr:les)
h)  If  the  Appe{1e
view  that
penaltv  of
impo*”J on’ui'”*pt.y””
bv the Disciplinary
Authority should  stand  but *;;;;;tpoint*””‘t
a fresh  entrant
taking into accounr  ot”r,1u1ir,!”;;;;;rr;;i”;r,  $;v,
not  be  ordered  as  a  part
cases  should
merely  rr;i’r;the’penalty
t;”.,f  in”‘””n””’it'”‘question
of  re-appointment
of  thel5
ex-employee, as a  fresh entrant, can be  considered separately,  as-  an  administrative
exerciie,  ln accordance  with  the extant  rules  on  the subject,  contained  in Rule 402,Indian
Railway  Establishment  Code,  Vol.-I.  In  all  such  cases  of  re-employment
dismissed/removed/compulsorily  retireC employees, specific approval of  the  authority
next higher  than  the disiiplinary/apnellate/revising authority, who had  last passed  orders
on  the disciplinary case  should  be obtained-
(Rule  402-RI and  Board’s  lettqr  l'”:IriDfiA)gg  RG6-6  dt.3’6-99)
i)  If  an employee is  transferred  to  another Railway/l)ivision  after  the  imposition  of  a
penalty, then  the Appeal will  lie  only  to  the  appropriate Appe-llate  Authority  on  the
ituit*uyfOivision  *hite  the employee  was working at the  time of  imposition of penalty,
notwithstanding  employee’  s  transfer.
(Board’s  letter  No.E(D&A)  69 RG 6-8 dt. 19’6.69)
20.  RevisionlReview
a)  Revision  is different  from  review.  Review  in  terms of Rule  25(A)  can be undertaken
only by the President  and  only when some  new evidence  which could not be produced  or
was not available  at the time clf passing  the order and which has  the effect of changing
the nature  of the case,  is brought  to the notice of President. Both revision and  review can
be  undertaken  either zuo-moto  c’:on subrnission  of a petition  by the employee.
b)  Revision can be undertaken  by the President,  Railway Board, GM or any other authority
not below  the rank of Dy.HOD.  It  can be undertaken on consideration  of  a Revision
Petition submitted  by the emplcyee or  ils a suo-moto  exercise. If  undertaken  suo’moto,
then  the  revisionary proceedings should not  be  started  till  disposal of  the  appeal, if
already  submitted  or till  the expiry of tlrc limitation  period of 45 days  for  submission  of
appeal.  This,  however, does not  apply  to  revision of  punishment in  case of  railway
(Rule  2s  (2)  of RS(D&A)  Rules,  1968)
c)  Where  a  revision  petition  is zubmi+ted  by  the  employee,  the  petition  should  be  dealt  with
in  the same  manner  as  if  it  werr:  an appeal.  Thug the time limit  for  submitting  the
revision  petition  is also  45 clays,  v.’hich  needs  to be  indicated  in the appellate  order  and
the  Revising  Authority  should  also  consider  the  case  in  the  same  manner  as  the  Appellate
Authority is  required  to do.
(Rule  25(3)  of RS(D&A) Rules  and  Board’s  letters  No: E(D&A) 84 RG6-44  dt:8.1.85
d)  The Revising  Authority has  to be higher  than  the Appellate  Authority  both in cases
where  an  appeal  had  been  submitted  and  disposed  of  and  where  no appeal  was  preferred.
This  stipulatioq  however  does  not  apply  to  revision  by President.
@ule  25(4)  ofRS(D&A)Rules,  i968)t6
e)  If  suo-moto  revision  is undertaken  beyond  the  time limits given  below,  then  it  can  be
done  only by  the General  Manager  or Railway Board provided  they are above  the
Appellate  Authorities  or  by  the President  even if  he happens  to  be the Appellate
i)Beyond  6 months  from  the  date  of  the  order  to be  revised  in case  where  it is proposed  to
impose  a  penalty  (where  no  penalty  is  in  force)  or enhance  a  penalty.
ii) Beyond  one  year  from  the  date  of the  order  to be  revised  in case  where  it is proposed  to
cancel  the  penalty  imposed  or  reduce  the  penalty.
These  time  limits are  relevant  only for suo-moto  proceedings  and  not for consideration
and  disposal  of Revision  Petitions,  which have  to be  done  only by prescribed  Revising
Authority  subject  to condonation  of delay,  if any,  in submission  of  rwision petitions.
(Rule  zs(s)  of RS(D&A)  Rules)
0  If  the Revising  Authority proposes  to  impose  a penalty  (where  no penalty  has  been
imposed)  or  enhance  the penalty,  then a show cause  notice has  to  be issued  to  the
Railway  servant  indicating  the proposed  penalty,  to enable  him  to represent  against  the
said  penalty.  If the  proposed  penalty  is such  that  holding  of an  inquiry  is essential  before
its imposition  and  if  an  inquiry has  not already  been  hild  in that case,  then  an  inquiry
should  first  be held before  the proposed  penalty can be  imposed  by  the Revising
(Proviso  (a)  and  (b)  under  Rule  25  (t) ofRS(D&A) Rules,  1968)
g)  There  are  certain  special  provisions  for non-gazetted  staft’as  under:-
i)A Group
employee  who  has  been  dismissed/removed/compulsorily  retired  can  submit
his re-vision  petition directly to  the General  Manager,  evin  though  the prescribed
Revising  Authority  may  be  a  lower  authority  in his  case  and  can  also  r:equest  the  General
Manager  to refer  his  case  to Railway  Rates  Tribunal  for advice.  In that  iase  the General
Manager  shall  refer  the  case  to Railway  Rates  Tribunal.  If the  General  Manager  does  not
propose  to accept  the  advice  of RRT, approval  of Railway  Board  is  required  before  final
orders  are  passed.
(Rule  24(2)  of RS(D&A)  Rules,  Board’s  leters  No.ES1  RG6-20  dt.t7.5.52,  E(D&A)61
RG6-28  dt.  s.6.63  and  E(D&A)83  RG  6-8  dt.2s.3.83).
iD  A  Group
Railway servant  who has  been  dismissed/removed/  compulsorily  retired
may  submit  his  revision  petition  directly  to the  Divisional  Railway  Manager  or where  he
is not  directly  under  control  of any  DRM  to  the  senior  most  administrativJgrade  officer.
(Rule  24(3)  ofRS(D&A)Rules,  1968)
h)  Revision  is a one-time  exercise  and  thdre  is no provision  for a second  revision  of the
case’ However,  if the  revisionary  order  imposes  i  penalty  where  no penalty  was  earlier
imposed  or  if  it  enhances  the penalty,  the rules provide  for  submiision  of an appeal2r
against  such  imposition/enhancernent  of the penalty,  to the next higher  authority. There
iJno provision  for  further  revision  ofthat appellate  order.
@oard’s letters  No:  E(D&A)79 RG6-40 dt:  18.8.81  &  No:  E(D&A)94 RG6-11
In cases  of enhancement  of the  penalty,  if the  lower  penalty  has  already  been  undergone
by  the  charged  offrcial  in whole  or in-part,  then  the  facts  relating  to the  original  penalty
can  be  taken  into consideration  by  the  Revising  Authority  who can  irnpose  an  additional
penalty  by way  of enhancement  of punishment.
(Board’s  letter  No:  855  RG6-1  4 dt:  29.2.56  and  No: E@&A)71  RG5-18  dt:12’12’72)
Revision/Review  of  disciplinary cases  already finalised before retirement of  the
concerned  Railway employee  cannot  be initiated  after his retirement  with  a view to
impose  a  cut  in  the  pensiorrary  benefits.  However,  in cases  where  a  show  cause  notice  for
suo-moto  revision had been  issued  before retirement  or  where a  revision petition
submitted  by  the  employee  was  pending at  the  time  of  retirement,  revisionary
proceedings  can  continue  after  retirement  also’
@oard’s  letterNo:  E(D&A)93  RG6-61  dt:l  t.1.2000)
pending Revision Petitions/Appeals  have  to  be  disposed  of  on  merits by  the
Revisin!/Appellate  Authority, even  if  the employee  concerned  may have  died  in  the
@oard’s  letter  No:  E(D&A)SS  RG6-46  dt: 1  l.l  1.85)
P  roceedjnggftelBgli  re  4Lcnt.
If  an employee  retires  w-hile  proceeding$  are continuing,  then  the proceedings  will  be
deemed  to be continuing  undir Rule  9 bf Roil*ay  Services  (Pension)Rules  1993. The
proceedings  should  be continued  even  after  retirement  in  the sanne  manner  as  if  the
lmployeels  in  service  and  the Disciplinary  Authority should  record  his decision  and
insieai of imposing  a penalty,  should  give  specific  recommendations  on  whether  a  cut  in
the  pensionary  ten-efrts  is warranted  oi not.  The  Disciplinary  Authority  need  not specify
the  quantum  of cut  to be  imposed.  tr{  in  the  opinion  of  the  Disciplinary  Authority,  a  cut  in
the  pensionary  benefits  is not warranted,  then  the  proceedings  can  be  dropped  by him at
his  level.  If,  however,  a  cut  in  the pensionary  benefits  is  recommended  by  the
Disciplinary  Authority,  then  the approval  of  the President  is required  before  an order
imposing  a-cut  in  the  pensionary  benefits  is  issued.  The  specific  recommendations  of  the
.on”e*”d  PHOD  andCPO  should  also  be  obtained  before  the  case  goes  for President’s
consideration.  The  President  is also  required  to consult  the  UPSC  before  he  passes  such
an order.  If  a person  is suspended  before  his retirement  but no chargesheet  has  been
issued  till  his retirement,  even  then  it would be  treated  as a case  where  departmental
proceedings  have  already  been  instituted  before  the  retirement  and  such  cases  should  also
be  dealt  with  in  the  same  manner  as  explained  above.
b)  I[  on  the date  of retirernent  of an  employee,  he  is neither  suspended  nor a chargesheet
issued  to  him, then proceedings  against  him can be instituted  only with President’sc)
approval.  In such  cases,  the  chargesheet  is  issued  on  behalf  ofthe President  and  it cannot
be  issued  in respect  of any  offence  which  had  taken  place  more  than  4 years  before  issue
ofthe charge  sheet.
If  the employee  is  under suspension  at  the time of  retirement,  for  the purpose  of
continuing  the  proceedings  under  Rule  9 of RS(Pensioa)  Rules,  the  proceedings  shall  be
deemed  to have  cofllmenced  from  the  date  of zuspension.  In such  a case  the  charge  sheet
can  be  issued  by  the  prescribed  disciplinary  authority  even  after  retirement  of  the  charged
offfilial. However,  this  fact  should  be  incorporated  in  the  proforma  for charge  sheet.
@oard’s  letter  No.E(D&A)  2000  RG6-4.1  dt.2t.l1.2000)
Minor penalty  proceedings  instituted  while a R.ailway  Serrrant  was  in service  can  also  be
continued  under  Rule  9 of Pension  Rules  and  a cut  in  the  pensionary  benefits  imposed  if  rnisconduct  or negligence  is established.  If  a departmental  inquiry has  not been
conducted  in such  a case,  then  a show-cause  notice  has  to be given  to the pensioner  to
represent. FIis representation  against  the  show-cause  notice should be  taken into
consideration  before  the  case  is  referred  to UPSC  and  final orders  passed.  However,  if an
inquiry has  already  been  held  then  there  is no need  to  issue  such  show-cause  notice.
However,  as far  as possible,  minor penalty  proceedings  should  be finalised before
retirernent  to avoid  their  continuation  after  r€tirsnent.
{Board’s  letter  No.E(D&A)87  RG6-1  13  dt.  I  i.11.87).
To ensure  that  disciplinary  proceedings  do  not  continue  after  retirement  for long  periods,
the  time schedule  given below has  to be  follo*’ed for  finalising  the case  and  sending
proposals,  ifwarranted,  to  the  President  for imposition  of a  cut  in  the  pensionary  benefits:
in cases  where  the proceedings  were  initiated  one  year or more prior to the date  of
retirement  of the Charged  Offieial,  the proposal  should  be sent  within 3 months  of the
date  of retirement  ofthe charged  official.
in cases  where  the proceedings  were  initiated  “,vithin  the  last  year  of the service  of the
charged  official,  the  propcsal  shoulci  be  sent  r.vithin  6 inenths  ficrn the  date  of retireme.nt
ofthe charged  ofiicial”
@oard’  s  d.  o.  letter  No.E@&A)97lRG6-Monitoring  (I) dt. 2A.7  .98)
All  proposals  sent  for  obtaining  President’s  sanction  for  imposition  of  a cut  in  the
pensionary  benfits  should  be  accompanied  by complete  papers  a:rd  information  specified
in  this  connection.
(tsoard’s  d.o.  letter  No.E(D&A)97  Rcr.5-Monitoring  (i) dt 28.1.2000).
If an  employee,  after  his  retirement,  is  found  guilty  in  judicial  prooeedings  for an  offence
committed  during his service,  a  cut  in  pensionary  benefits  can be  imposed  by  the
President,  after  consulting  LIPSC  and  there  is no requirement  of giving notice  in  this
regard  to  the  retired  railway servant.
f)General Managerl  I
g)  If Government’s  displeasure  is  to be  communrcated  to retired  Railway  employees,  then
the  authorities  who  would  be  competent  to do  so  would  be  as  under:
For  retired  employees  upto  and  including
Selection  Grade  of JA Grade  in respect  of whom
major/minor  penalty  proceedings had  already
been  initiate.d  before  their  retirement and where
such  proceedings  are  to  be  dropped  but
Government’s  displeasure  is  to be communicated.
For retired Group
and Group
employees  in respect  of whom it  is decided  not to
initiate  departmental  proceedings  for  imposition
of a cut in the pensionary  benefits  after  ret-irement
but  communicate  Gcvernment’s  displeasure
For  retired Group
officers of  SA Grade and
above in  respect of  whom major/rninor penalty
proceedings had  aiready been  initiated  before
their retirement and where such proceedings  are
to be dropped  but Governrnent’s  displeasure  is to
be  communicated.
For retired Group’.d’ Officers  in respect  of whom
it  is  decided  not  to  initiate  departmental
proceedings for  imposition  of  a  cut  in  the
pensionary  benefits  after  retirement  but
comrnunicate  Government’  s  di  spleasure  instead.
For any retired railway employee  against  whom
departmental  proceedings  for  imposition of a cut
in  the  pensionary benefits have been instituted
after retirement and where, on  consideration  of
the case,  the proceedings  are to  be dropped but
Government’s  displeasure  is  to be communicated.
Addl.General  Manager
who  has been ordered by
the Competent  Authority to
look after  the current  duiies
of the General  Manager  in
the absence  of  a  regularly
posted  General Manager,  2
DG/RDSO. Director
General/RSC and  CAOs
(having  independent
charge  of  their
il  Raiiway Board  I
II  President

No comments yet

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: