RBE No. 196/1999: Disciplinary Cases – Time Schedule

No.E(D&A)97 RG6-26, dated 12.08.1999

Sub: Effective implementation of model time schedule – Removal of impediments reg.

1.     It has been brought to the notice of the Board that delays continue to occur in the finalization of the disciplinary cases despite the model time schedule prescribed for the purpose. Certain impediments that come in the way of effective implementation of model time schedule have also been pointed out as indicated below:-

(a) In most of the cases, relied upon listed documents mentioned in the charge sheet are not supplied to the charged official along with the charge sheet.

(b) Even when the documents like fact-finding/ accident enquiry reports are supplied, the statement of witnesses examined are not supplied.

(c) Names of the above Inquiry Committee Members are not furnished to the charged official for judging the level of Disciplinary Authority and Inquiry Official.

(d) The Presenting Officers from the CBI and Vigilance evade the enquiry with lame excuses.

2.     The matter has been examined and it is observed that instructions already exist to avoid delay in enquiries in the disciplinary cases, which also take into account the constraints mentioned in para-1 above.

It is clear from the instructions contained in Board’s letter No.E(D&A)83 RG6-14, dated 29.03.1985 (RBE No. 93/1985) read with letter of same number dated 05.12.1985 (RBE No. 324/1985) that Photostat/ typed copies of the listed/ relied upon documents should be furnished to the charged official along with the charge memo, as far as possible.

Similarly, with the review view to expediting completion of inquiry proceedings instructions contained in Board letter No.E(D&A) 85 RG-21, dated 30.05.1985 already provided that in the preliminary enquiry itself, where both the charged official and the Presenting Officer appear for the first time, the Inquiry Officer should lay down a definite time bound programme in consultation with both of them for completion of various stages of the inquiry before the regular hearing is taken up.

The regular hearing once started should be conducted on day-to-day basis until completed and adjournments should not be granted on frivolous grounds.

3.     The points mentioned at item (b) and (c) of para 1 above have also been examined and it is observed that there should be no objection to intimating to the charged official the name(s) of the officer who conducted the Fact Finding Inquiry which led to the issue of charge sheet to him so that he is satisfied that the instructions contained in Board’s letter No.E(D&A)62 RG6-19, dated 10.04.1962 and No.E(D&A)70 RG6-31, dated 15.06.1970 have been observed in his case.

These instructions provided that except in cases arising out of Fact Finding Inquiries like Accident Inquiries, inquiries consequent to Audit Reports, Reports from SPE and inquiries made by the Vigilance Organization, inquiries for disciplinary action are not to be entrusted to an officer lower in status than that of the officer who conducted the Fact Finding Inquiry.

Likewise, if it is decided in a particular case to furnish a copy of the Fact Finding Inquiry Report to the charged official, it would not be correct to deny to the charged official the statement of witnesses examined during the Fact Finding Inquiry, which formed a part of the Fact Finding Inquiry Report.

4.     It is advised that the position brought in para 2 and 3 above may be kept in view and followed scrupulously so that delays do not occur in finalization of disciplinary cases on these accounts.

Other measures that have been suggested under letters issued from Board from time to time to facilitate expeditious disposal of disciplinary cases would, of course, also continue to be followed in the interest of speedy finalization of disciplinary cases.

Download Railway Board Circular RBE No. 196/1999