MR. SHANTANU BASU Vs. UOI & ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) CM No. 4744/2012

(2.) THE petitioner has two issues. The first pertains to the Office Memorandum dated February 16, 1971 which requires that inquiries under CCS (CCA) Rules, 1965 should be entrusted to officers who are sufficiently senior to the officers whose conduct is being inquired. The second is to be permitted a legal practitioner as the Defence Assistant at the inquiry. The petitioner is a member of the Indian Audit and Accounts Service. He is of the year 1984 batch. The Inquiry Officer is one Shri V. Ravindran, an officer of the Indian Audit and Accounts Service, but of 1983 batch. Both hold equivalent posts.

(3.) THE sweeping statement made by the Tribunal cannot be accepted for the reason the purpose of an inquiry is to bring out the truth and this would mean that the Inquiry Officer should be a person who can act without any fear and has no debts or favours to repay. A subordinate officer cannot be the Inquiry Officer against his superior officer for the reason the superior office may be the initiating officer or the accepting officer pertaining to his ACRs, and this may influence the Inquiry Officer.