Government Instructions issued from 1956 to 2005 PART I

GOVERNMENT OF KARNATAKA
IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT ORDERS/ OFFICIAL MEMORANDA ETC., RELATED TO THE KARNATAKA CIVIL SERVICES (CCA) RULES, 1957.
From 1956 upto 9-2-2005bold text
DPAL 44 RASAPRA 2006
IMPORTANT GOVERNMENT ORDERS/ OFFICIAL MEMORANDA ETC., RELATED TO THE KARNATAKA CIVIL SERVICES (CCA) RULES, 1957.
From 1956 upto 9-2-2005
DPAL 44 RASAPRA 2006

PART I PART II part3 PART IIII part3 PART IV

Sl. No.
Number and date of communication
Subject
Page No.
1
Cir. AD 19181-94 SE (AC) 5.12.1956
Procedure in Anti - Corruption cases.
2
G.O. GAD 18 PHS 57 20.3.1957
Prompt transmission of appeals of Government Servants with relevant documents.
3
O.M. GAD (S-1) 80 RSR 57 9.5.1957
Notifying the dismissal of Government servants.
4
O.M. OSD 2 SMR 57 29.6.1957
Procedure for consulting the Public Service Commission in Disciplinary and other matters.
5
G.O. RD 185-RGP 57/2023-26A 17.7.1957
Departmental enquiries-Instuctions for conducting of
6
Cir. GAD (S-1) 25 SSR 57 13.9.1957
Anti-Corruption cases-punishment.
7
O.M. GAD (OM) 9 SMR 57 12.12.1957
Procedure for submission of representation by Government servant.
8
O.M. GAD (OM) 3 CAR 57 14.12.1957
Procedural instructions regarding the holding of Departmental Enquiries under the Mysore civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957.
9
O.M. GAD (S-1) 80 RSR 57 4.1.1958
Preparation and submission of quarterly returns of dismissed Government servants
10
O.M. GAD (S-1) 80 RSR 57 4.2.1958
Quarterly statements of dismissals of Government Servants-forwadal of notification.
11
Cir.GAD 11 GEI 58 30.5.1958
Confidential Records-entries
12
O.M.GAD 27 SSR 58 18.10.1958
Procedure in Disciplinary cases avoidance of delay.
13
Cir. GAD (51) 38 SSR 58 30.10.1958
Misappropriation of Government money-Enquiry-Procedure for.
14
ADDENDUM
Criminal misconduct-Government Servants-Procedure to be followed.
15
Cir. GAD 36 DIF (Int) 58 15.11.1958
States Reorganisation-Provisions as to services-procedure in respect of disciplinary matters.
16
O.M. GAD (S-1) 86 RSR 58 21.11.1958
Disciplinary action against Government Servants.
17
Cir. GAD (S-1) 35 SSR 58 8.1.1959
Instructions regarding the Departmental proceedings against Government servants for misconduct.
18
O.M. GAD 6 OSR 59 25.4.1959
Procedural instructions regarding Departmental Enquiries under the C.C.A. Rules.
19
O.M. GAD 8 OSR 59 18.5.1959
Supply of copies of evidence, etc. to delinquent officers.
20
O.M. GAD (S-1) 23 SSR 59 2.7.1959
"Warning" and "Censure" Distinction between.
21
O.M. GAD (S-1) 44 SSR 59 20.7.1959.
Imposition of penalty of reduction specifying the period.
22
O.M. GAD (S-1) 56 SSR 59 9.10.1959.
Promotion of Government servants whose conduct is under enquiry.
23
O.M.6400/58-15 24.3.1960.
States Reorganisation-Appeals against orders of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service passed by the pre-Reorganised Madras State prior to 1st November 1956-Authority to dispose of-Decisions of the Government of India-Communicated.
24
O.M. GAD 49 DIF 59 8.4.1960
Procedure in respect of Disciplinary matters.
25
G.O. GAD 21 OSR 60. 28.7.1960.
Departmental enquiries-Taking the assistance of another Government Servant in presenting his defence.
26
O.M. GAD 35 SSR 60 15.10.1960.
Dismissal of Government servants in Public services.
27
O.M. GAD 92 SRS 60 1.12.1960
Clarification regarding Rule 59, Mysore Civil Services Rules.
28
Cir. GAD 59 OAC 61 30.9.1961
Criminal misconduct-Government servants-procedure to be followed.
29
O.M. GAD 12 OSR 61 dt. 25.10.1961
Procedure to be follwed in forwarding investigation papers to the Anticorruption Department.
30
O.M.GAD 14 OSR 61 dt. 13.11.1961
Supply of copies of documents to the delinquent official.
31
Cir. GAD (S-1) 43 SRR 62, dt. 1.6.1962
Clarification in respect of Rule 11(5) of K.C.S(C.C.A) Rules, 1957.
32
O.M.GAD (S-1) 33 SSR 61, dt. 27.6.1962
Failure to follow the prescribed procedure laid down for departmental proceedings against Government servants for misconduct. Issue instructions reg:
33
O.M. GAD 6 SIN 62 dt. 2.4.1963
Orders of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement of Government servants from service set aside by Courts-Issue instructions for guidance of competent authorities.
34
Cir. GAD 46 OAC 64 dt. 16.6.1964
Requisitions for records required for purposes of investigations and inquiries by officers of the Anti Corruption Department.
35
O.M. GAD 31 SRR 64 dt. 24.11.1964
Instructions regarding preparation and submission of half yearly returns of dismissed Government servants.
36
O.M. GAD 21 SSR 65 dt. 26.2.1965
Public service-circumstances under which a Government servant may be placed under suspension-instructions regarding.
37
O.M. GAD 105 SRR 64, dt. 23.3.1965
Public services-Departmental proceedings against Government servants involved in cases of fraud, embezzlement, loss of Government money etc.,-instructions-
38
O.M. GAD 129 SRR 65 dt. 29.12.1965
Preparation and submission of half yearly returns of dismissed/debarred Government servants-further instructions regard-
39
O.M. GAD 171 SSR 65 dt. 2.2.1966
Departmental enquiries under Rule 14 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957-Issues clarifications reg
40
Cir. GAD 18 SSR 66 dt. 2.3.1966
Instructions to officers to offer cooperation in giving evidence, etc., in any Enquiry by Enquiry Officers during enquiry proceedings under C.C.A. Rules and Vigilance Commission Rules.
41
O.M.GAD 80 SSR 65 dt. 11.4.1966
Promotion of Government servants involved in Departmenal Enquiries.
42
Cir. ED 34 RPS 67 dt. 27.4.1967
Letter No. G 6598 dated 15.12.1996 from the Compiler, Mysore Gazette.
43
O.M. GAD 42 PVC 66 dt. 5.8.1967
Stipulation of time limit for completing the Departmental Enquiry entrusted by Government to the State Vegilance Commission.
44
Letter GAD 54 SRR 67 dt. 14/16.9.1967
Continuance of Departmental Proceedings after retirement, Application of new Rule 214 of Mysore Civil Services Rules.
45
O.M. FD 133 SRS 67 dt. 3.1.1968
Withholding/withdrawal of pension under Rule 214 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules.
46
O.M. GAD 25 SSR 68 dt. 26.6.1968
Procedure in disciplinary cases-withholding of increments.
47
O.M. GAD 47 SSR 68 dt. 17.9.1968
Publication of notices in respect of Departmental proceedings against Government servants.
48
O.M. GAD 57 PVC 68 dt. 18.10.1968
Disposal of cases received from the State Vigilance Commission - stipulation of time limit.
49
O.M. GAD 47 SSR 68 dt. 8.1.1969
Publication of notices, etc. in respect of departmental proceedings against Government servants
50
O.M. GAD 7 SSR 69 dt. 25.3.1969
Penalty of reduction-specifying the period
51
O.M. GAD 57 PVC 68 7.6.1969
Disposal of cases received from the Bureau of Investigation of the Vigilance Commission stipulation of time limit.
52
O.M. GAD 42 SSR 69 dt. 25.8.1969
Bar for promotions during the period of penalty.
53
O.M. GAD 26 SSR 72 dt. 23.6.1972
Departmental Enquiries-failure to follow the prescribed procedure.
54
Cir. GAD 29 SSR 72 dt. 4.8.1972
State Vigilance Commission Nature of cases in which investigations and inquiries are to be entrusted to it.
55
O.M. GAD 1 SSR 73 dt. 9.2.1973
Government servants involved in the Departmental enquiries taking assistance of other Government servant.
56
O.M. GAD 18 SSR 73 dt. 2.11.1973
Withholding of increment (s) with cumulative effect-procedure to be followed in imposing the penalty of.
57
G.O. GAD 4 SSR 74 dt. 3.4.1974
Departmental Enquiry Proceedings sanctions remuneration to the presenting officers appointed in the –
58
O.M. GAD 12 SSR 74 dt. 2.5.1974
Withholding of increment (s) with cumulative effect-procedure to be followed in imposing the penalty of -
59
Cir. GAD 47 PVC 74 dt. 1.7.1974
Requisitions for records, reports, etc., required for purpose of investigations and inquiries by the officers of the Vigilance Commission
60
Cir. GAD 42 PVC 74 dt. 15.7.1974
Submission of reports of the Vigilance Commission-pendency in the Secretariat.
61
Cir. GAD 57 PVC 74 dt. 16.9.1974
Issue of instructions to Heads of Department etc., regarding assistance of officials of other Departments to the Vigilance Commission.
62
O.M. GAD 63 SSR 74 dt. 3.12.1974
Delay in initiating action against Government servants in cases investigated by Vigilance Commission.
63
G.O. GAD 6 SSR 75 dt. 31.3.1975
Procedure for drawing remuneration by the presenting officer appointed in the Departmental inquiry proceedings.
64
Cir. GAD 14 SSR 75 dt. 21.5.1975
Instructions regarding Disciplinary Proceedings against Government servants under Rule 12 of the K.S.C.S. (C.C.A) Rules, 1957.
65
D.O. GAD 23 IPN 75 dt. 17.6.1975
Cases of Vigilance Commission pending with Government Review of.
66
O.M. FD 213 SRS 71 dt. 20.10.1975
Rule 59 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules - clarification regarding.
67
No. GAD 24 SSR 75, dt. 11.12.1975
Powers of Deputy Commissioners inrespect of class - III & Class IV posts U/r 10.
68
O.M. GAD 2 SSR 76 dt. 15.3.1976
Appeal petitions/Review petitions to the Governor Disposal of - Procedure to be followed in respect of.
69
Cir. DPAR 70 SSR 76 dt. 29.1.1977
Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 - Amendments of rule 11-A, 25 and 26 of the - clarifies the position under the –
70
O.M. DPAR 18 SSR 77, dt. 23.5.1977
Disciplinary proceedings against Government servants.
71
O.M. DPAR 11 SSR 77 dt. 5.7.1977
Suspension of Government servants involved in mis-appropriation cases etc., -Re vocation of instructions regarding.
72
Cir. DPAR 28 SSR 77 dt. 28.7.1977
Clarification regarding 'mis-appropriation' by a Government servant amounts to corruption.
73
Cir. DCA 16 ARB 77 dt. 24.11.1977
Vigilance Commission - Reference of - Complaints, Allegations against the gazetted officers to the by Heads of Departments clarification regarding.
74
Cir. DPAR 24 SSR 78 dt. 14.7.1978
Imposition of penalty of withholding of increments and reduction to lower stages in time scale of pay or to a lower post etc-instructions reg.
75
Cir. DPAR 24 SSR 77 dt. 16.8.1978
Suspension of Government officials
76
O.M. FD 17 SRS 78 dt. 28.9.1978
Instructions under Rule 59 of the Karnataka Civil Services Rules-Further clarification regarding.
77
Note
Note on the procedure to be followed at the Secretariat level in handling cases coming under Rule 14-A of the K.C.S (Classification Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957.
78
Cir. DPAR 22 SSR 78 dt. 29.12.1978
Clarification regarding suspension of Government servants.
79
Cir. DPAR 18 SSR 79 dt. 2.3.1979
Departmental enquiries-cases to be referred to Chief Secretary Procedure, regarding.
80
Cir. DPAR 30 SSR 79 dt. 17.4.1979
Un-authorised absence of Government servants, instructions regarding quick disposal of enquiry cases.
81
Cir. DPAR 46 SSR 79 dt. 28.6.1979
Appointment of Presenting Officers in Disciplinary cases under the C.C.A Rules.
82
Cir. DPAR 2 SIN 79 dt. 4.7.1979
Communications to be addressed to the Vigilance Commission-Instruction -reg.
83
Cir. DPAR 71 PVC 78 dt. 17.7.1979
Reinstatement of Government servants placed under suspension at the request of the State Vigilance Commission.
84
Cir. DPAR 56 SSR 78 dt. 16.8.1979
Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957 - Amendment of Rule 11-A-further clarification in respect of issue of Second Show Cause Notice.
85
Cir. DPAR 80 SSR 79 dt. 14.3.1980
Clarification regarding sanction of Government for payment of subsistence allowance for a period beyond 6 months.
86
Cir. DPAR 17 SSR 80 dt. 28.4.1980
Avoiding unnecessary references to Govt. in initiating disciplinary proceedings.
87
Cir. DPAR 61 SSR 80 dt. 1.10.1980
Service of order, notices etc. under Rule 28 A of the K.C.S (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957.
88
Cir. DPAR 17 SSR 79 dt. 17.10.1980
Suspension of Government servants-further instructions regarding.
89
O.M. DPAR 5 SSR 79 dt. 8.7.1981
Departmental inquiry-Appointing Deputy Commissioners of inquiries or Assistant Commissioners of inquiries of the Karnataka State Vigilance Commission as the Inquiry Officers.
90
O.M. DPAR 5 SSR 79 dt. 17.8.1981
Departmental Inquiry Appointing Deputy Commissioners of Inquiries or Assistant Commissioners of inquiries of the Karnataka State Vigilance Commission as the Inquiry Officer.
91
O.M. DPAR 96 KLU 81 dt. 29.10.1981
Investigation/Enquiry Reports by the Karnataka State Vigilance Commission-Prompt disposal of-instructions-reg.
92
Cir. DPAR 466 SAS 81 dt. 3.11.1981
Issue of instructions regarding rendering of assistance by Government servants to the Vigilance Commission in departmental inquiries.
93
O.M. DPAR 59 SDE 81 dt. 17.12.1981
Suspension of Government servants - Review of cases of prolonged suspension.
94
O.M. LAW 166 LAG 81 dt. 18.12.1981
Review of Court cases.
95
O.M. LAW 166 LAG 81(P) dt. 4.3.1982.
Review of Judgements wherein decisions have been given by the courts against the State.
96
Cir. DPAR 12 SDE 82 dt. 13.4.1982
Departmental Proceedings against Government servants placed under suspension - delay in instituting.
97
Cir. DPAR 10 SDE 82 dt. 19.4.1982
Departmental enquiries-instructions to follow prescribed procedure.
98
Cir.DPAR 8 SDE 82 dt. 28.4.1982
Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957-Clarification regarding second show cause notice.
99
Cir. DPAR 8 SDE 82 dt. 17.7.1982
Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957-further clarification regarding second show cause notice.
100
Cir. DPAR 21 SDE 83 dt. 1.6.1983
Review of disciplinary cases which are pending finalisation-prescription of monthly progress report.
101
O.M. r¦JDgï 41 J¸ïrE 83, ¢£ÁAPÀ 16.8.1983.
MAzÀÄ ªÀμÀðzÀ CªÀ¢üAiÉƼÀUÉ ¤ªÀøwÛ ºÉÆAzÀ°gÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ £ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛgÀĪÀ E¯ÁSÁ vÀ¤SÉUÀ¼ÀÄŠEªÀÅUÀ¼À ²ÃWÀæ «¯ÉêÁjUÉ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
102
Cir. DPAR 55 SDE 83, dt. 14.11.1983
Review of disciplinary cases which are pending finalisation-further instructions regarding.
103
Cir. DPAR 8 SDE 84 dt. 14.3.1984
Defending the cases/suits filed in Courts against Government Instructions-reg.
104
O.M. DPAR 12 SDE 83 dt. 21.4.1984
Suspension of Government servants and their promotions pending inquiries instructions regarding.
105
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 33 J¸ïrE 83, ¢£ÁAPÀ 24.5.1984
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957Š¤ªÀøwÛ DUÀ°gÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É EgÀĪÀ E¯ÁSÁ vÀ¤SÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÇtðUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
106
O.M. DPAR 12 SDE 83 dt. 21.6.1984
Reinstatement of Government servants placed under suspension at the request of the State Vigilance Commission.
107
O.M. DPAR 16 SDE 84 dt. 2.8.1984
Departmental Inquiry under rule 11 of the K.C.S (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957-entrusting the cases to the officers of Karnataka State Vigilance Commission.
108
O.M. DPAR 30 SDE 84 dt. 27.11.1984
Joint Inquiry against Government servants under Rule 13 of the Karnataka Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957
109
O.M. DPAR 43 SDE 84 dt. 14.2.1985
Review of disciplinary cases which are pending finalisation prescription of quarterly progress report.
110
O.M. DPAR 12 SDE 83 dt. 4.3.1985
Suspension of Government servants and their promotions pending inquiries instructions regarding.
111
O.M. DPAR 13 SDE 85 dt. 3.7.1985
Suspension of Government servants and their reinstatement.
112
O.M. DPAR 14 SDE 85 dt. 5.7.1985
Withholding of special increments such as stagnation increment or increment for passing departmental examinations as a measure of penalty under Rule 8 of the K.C.S (C.C.A) Rules, 1957-clarification regarding.
113
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 12 J¸ïrE 86, ¢£ÁAPÀ 22.5.1986
E¯ÁSÁ vÀ¤SÉŠ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛ CxÀªÁ G¥À ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛ CxÀªÁ ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛzÀ ¹§âA¢AiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ C¢üPÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «ZÁgÀuÁ¢üPÁjAiÀÄ£ÁßV £ÉëĸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
114
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 9 J¸ïrE 86, ¢£ÁAPÀ 5.6.1986
E¯ÁSÁ vÀ¤SÉAiÀÄ°è ²¸ÀÄÛ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀªÀÅ D¥Á¢vÀ £ËPÀgÀ¤UÉ DgÉÆÃ¥ÀUÀ¼À «μÀAiÀÄ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ zÀÄ£ÀðqÀvÉ CxÀªÁ zÀĪÀðvÀð£ÉAiÀÄ DgÉÆÃ¥ÀUÀ¼À ¥ÀnÖAiÀÄ£ÀÄß vÀAiÀiÁj¹ MzÀV¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
115
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 15 J¸ïrE 86, ¢£ÁAPÀ 1.7.1986
E¯ÁSÁ vÀ¤SÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀĪÀ°è ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¹gÀĪÀ PÁAiÀÄðPÀæªÀĪÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÀjAiÀiÁV C£ÀĸÀj¸À¢gÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
116
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 8 J¸ïrE 85, ¢£ÁAPÀ 30.12.1986
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ¥ÀǪÀð¨sÁ« vÀ¤SÉ: E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§Š ¸ÁªÀðd¤PÀ ¯ÉPÀÌ¥ÀvÀæ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ ²¥sÁgÀ¸ÀÄìŠ «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
117
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ £ÀqÀªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ r¦JDgï 35 J¸ïrE 86, ¢£ÁAPÀ 7Š1Š1987
CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àg﫯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß gÀa¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
118
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 16 ¸ÉÃE« 87, ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.7.1987
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉŠ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛ CxÀªÁ G¥À ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛ CxÀªÁ ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛzÀ ¹§âA¢ AiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ C¢üPÁjAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «ZÁgÀuÁ¢üPÁjAiÀÄ£ÁßV £ÉëĸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
119
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É r¦JDgï 25 J¸ïrE 84, ¢£ÁAPÀ 27.7.1987
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÛÄ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957ŠD¥Á¢vÀ £ËPÀgÀ¤UÉ ªÀĺÁzÀAqÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¢ü¸ÀĪÀ ªÉÆzÀ®Ä JgÀqÀ£Éà μÉÆÃPÁ¸ï £ÉÆÃnÃ¸ï ¤ÃqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀàμÀÖ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
120
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 28 ¸ÉÃE« 87, ¢£ÁAPÀ 17.9.1987
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957ŠªÀgÀzÀQëuÉ «μÀAiÀÄzÀ°è ªÀÄgÀt ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è M¼ÀUÁVgÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
121
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 32 ¸ÉÃE« 87, ¢£ÁAPÀ 26.10.1987
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÁ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀ®Ä ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛPÉÌ ªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
122
O.M. DPAR 16 SDE 88 dt. 28.3.1988
Sanction for prosecution of Government servants instructions - reg.
123
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 24 ¸ÉÃE« 88, ¢ 6.6.1988
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
124
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 35 ¸ÉÃE« 88, ¢£ÁAPÀ 6.10.1988
gÁdå ¸ÀPÁðj ¸ÉêÉUÀ¼À°è ¥ÁæzÉòPÀ ¥Áæw¤zsÀåvÉAiÀÄ PÀÄjvÀÄŠPÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957gÀ C£ÀħAzsÀŠ11 ªÀÄvÀÄÛ 111PÉÌ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr.
125
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 4 ¸ÉÃE« 89, ¢£ÁAPÀ 31.1.1989
C£À¢üPÀøvÀªÁV UÉÊgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVgÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß PÉ®¸ÀPÉÌ ªÁ¥À¸ÀÄì vÉUÉzÀÄPÉƼÀÄîªÀ §UÉΊ¸ÀàμÀÖ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
126
C.eÕÁ. ¹C¸ÀÄE 16 ¸ÉÃE« 89, ¢£ÁAPÀ 26.6.1989
®AZÀ ¤ªÀÄÆð®£Á C¢ü¤AiÀĪÀÄzÀ CrAiÀÄ°è vÀ¤SÉUÉ M¼ÀUÁVgÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
127
O.M. DPAR 22 SDE 89 dt. 11.10.1989
Revocation of suspension order on the quashing of suspension order by the Courts-guidelines.
128
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 2 J¸ïrE 90, ¢£ÁAPÀ 22.2.1990
¤ªÀøwÛ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀÅ£Àgï £ÉêÀÄPÀ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¤ªÀøwÛAiÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀ ¸ÉêÁ CªÀ¢üAiÀÄ «¸ÀÛgÀuÉ PÁAiÀÄð¤ÃwAiÀÄ ¥ÀÅ£Àgï ¥Àj²Ã®£É.
129
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 6 ¸ÉïÉÆÃAiÀÄÄ 90, ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.3.1990
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (¹¹J) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½, 1957gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 14ŠJ C£ÀéAiÀÄ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß «ZÁgÀuÉUÁV PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛPÉÌ ªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¤zÉðñÀ£À
130
O.M. DPAR 14 SDE 90 dt. 16.5.1990
Prompt disposal of appeal petition submitted by the Government servant against the order of the disciplinary authority by the appellate authority-Instructions reg.
131
O.M. DPAR 18 SDE 90 dt. 10.7.1990
Sanction for prosecution of Government servants instructions regarding.
132
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 6 J¸ï.r.E 91, ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.3.1992
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÛÄ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957ŠD¥Á¢vÀ £ËPÀgÀ¤UÉ PÀpt zÀAqÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¢ü¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀàμÀÖ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
133
O.M. DPAR 22 SRR 93 dt. 14.7.1993
Department Promotion Committee in respect of promotions to the State Services in the basis of seniority-cum-merit-Procedure when a departmental enquiry/Court Proceedings is pending.
134
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹C¸ÀÄE 12 ¸ÉÃE« 94, ¢£ÁAPÀ 7.12.1994
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957ŠD¥Á¢vÀ £ËPÀgÀjUÉ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ £ÀAvÀgÀ «ZÁgÀuÁ ¥Áæ¢üPÁjAiÀÄ ªÀgÀ¢AiÀÄ£ÀÄß PÉÆlÄÖ vÀzÀ£ÀAvÀgÀ zÀAqÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß «¢ü¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
135
O.M. DPAR 3 SDE 94 dt. 26.2.1994
Unauthorised absence of Government employees instructions to deal with such absence.
136
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 4 J¸ïrE 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.2.1995
CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àg﫯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä EgÀĪÀ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÉ ªÀÄAr¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
137
C.eÕÁ. r¦JDgï 1 J¸ïrE 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 15.3.1995
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ CªÀiÁ£ÀvÀÄÛ ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ¥ÀÅ£Àgï £ÉêÀÄPÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ
138
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 6 ¸ÉÃE« 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 16.3.1995
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ CªÀiÁ£ÀvÀÄÛ:¥ÀÅ£Àgï £ÉêÀÄPÀŠE¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§Š«¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
139
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 17 ¸ÉÃE« 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 28.10.1995
CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àgï «¯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä EgÀĪÀ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÉ ªÀÄAr¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
140
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 13 ¸ÉÃE« 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 7.11.1995
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ C¦Ã®Ä) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957gÀrAiÀÄ°è E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆaUÀ¼ÀÄ.
141
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 16 ¸ÉÃE« 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 23.11.1995
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ DgÀA©ü¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
142
¸ÀPÁðj DzÉñÀ ¹D¸ÀÄE 9 ¸ÉÃE« 96, ¢£ÁAPÀ 22.6.1996
¹.D.¸ÀÄ. E¯ÁSÉAiÀÄ ¸ÉêÉUÀ¼ÀÄ «¨sÁUÀzÀ PÁAiÀÄðªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ°è §gÀĪÀ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼À CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àg﫯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß gÀa¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
143
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 9 ¸ÉÃE« 95, ¢£ÁAPÀ 26.6.1996
Qæ«Ä£À¯ï £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è «ZÁgÀuÉUÉ M¼À¥ÀlÄÖ C¥ÀgÁzsÀPÁÌV zÀAqÀ£ÉUÉ UÀÄjAiÀiÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆa.
144
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 7 ¸ÉÃE« 96, ¢£ÁAPÀ 4.7.1996
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ªÀ»¹zÀ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¤ªÀøwÛ ªÀAiÀĸÀì£ÀÄß £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
145
Cir. DPAR 4 SDE 96 dt. 28.8.1996
Avoiding delay in initiating departmental enquiries-instructions-regarding.
146
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 1 ¸ÉÃE« 97, ¢£ÁAPÀ 18.2.1997
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ C¦Ã®Ä) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957gÀ C£ÀĸÀÆa I, II, III ªÀÄvÀÄÛ IV PÉÌ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr PÀÄjvÀÄ.
147
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 16 ¸ÉÃE« 96 ¢£ÁAPÀ 21.4.1997
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¤®A§£ÉAiÀÄ°èqÀĪÀ ºÁUÀÆ ¥ÀÅ£Àgï £ÉêÀÄPÀ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
148
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 3 ¸ÉÃE« 97 ¢£ÁAPÀ 29.5.1997
C£À¢üPÀøvÀ UÉÊgÀĺÁdgÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
149
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 14 ¸ÉÃE« 96 ¢£ÁAPÀ 31.5.1997
²¹Û£À PÀæªÀĪÀ£ÀÄß DgÀA©ü¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è, £ÀqɸÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è ºÁUÀÆ CAwªÀÄUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ºÁUÀÆ ¨ÁQ EgÀĪÀ ²¹Û£À ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À ¥ÀæUÀwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àgï CªÀ¯ÉÆÃQ¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ºÁUÀÆ G¸ÀÄÛªÁj (monitoring) §UÉÎ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
150
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 6 ¸ÉÃE« 97 ¢£ÁAPÀ 2.7.1997
UÀÆæ¥ïŠ© ªÀUÀðzÀ C¢üPÁjUÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É ²¹Û£À PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¹ zÀAqÀ£É «¢ü¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
151
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 2 ¸ÉÃE« 97 ¢£ÁAPÀ 8.7.1997
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
152
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 9 ¸ÉÃE« 97 ¢£ÁAPÀ 11Š8Š1997
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÁ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£ÀgÁªÀ¯ÉÆÃQ¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
153
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 8 ¸ÉÃE« 94 ¢£ÁAPÀ 3Š11Š1997
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ £ÁUÀjÃPÀ ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ C¦Ã®Ä) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 28ŠJ gÀr DzÉñÀ, £ÉÆÃnøÀÄ, ªÀÄAvÁzÀªÀÅUÀ¼À£ÀÄß eÁj ªÀiÁqÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ §UÉÎ.
154
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É r¦JDgï 5 ¸ÉÃE« 96 ¢£ÁAPÀ 2Š12Š1997
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄUÀ¼À°è Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ªÉÆPÀzÀݪÉÄ ¨ÁQ EzÁÝUÀ CzÉà DgÉÆÃ¥ÀUÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É ²¹Û£À PÀæªÀÄ:E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
155
Cir. DPAR 17 SDE 97 dt. 9.12.1997
Arrest of Civil Servants - regarding
156
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 1 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 24Š1Š1998
CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àg﫯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä C¥ÀgÀ ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ðAiÀĪÀgÀ CzsÀåPÀëvÉAiÀÄ°è gÀa¹zÀ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÉ ªÀÄAr¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
157
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 1 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 19Š2Š1998
CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£Àg﫯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä C¥ÀgÀ ªÀÄÄRå PÁAiÀÄðzÀ²ð AiÀĪÀgÀ CzsÀåPÀëvÉAiÀÄ°è gÀa¹zÀ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄAzÉ ªÀÄAr¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
158
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 6 ¸ÉÃE« 96 ¢£ÁAPÀ 6Š4Š1998
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄUÀ¼À°è Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ªÉÆPÀzÀݪÉÄ ¨ÁQ EzÁÝUÀ CzÉà DgÉÆÃ¥ÀUÀ¼À ªÉÄÃ¯É ²¹Û£À PÀæªÀÄ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß £ÀqɸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀÄgÀÄ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
159
¸ÀPÁðj DzÉñÀ ¹D¸ÀÄE 3 ¸ÉÃE« 96, ¢£ÁAPÀ 24Š4Š1998
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½, 1957gÀrAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ªÀøvÀÛ £ÁåAiÀiÁ¢üñÀgÀÄ ºÁUÀÆ ¤ªÀøvÀÛ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ C¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ ªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
160
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 2 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 16Š7Š1998.
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À®Ä ªÀÄAdÆgÁw ¤ÃqÀĪÀ §UÉΊªÀÄgÀÄ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
161
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 9 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 22Š7Š1998
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ DgÀA©ü¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
162
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 9 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 3.8.1998
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ DgÀA©ü¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
163
C.eÕÁ. ¹D¸ÀÄE 3 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 5Š8Š1998
Qæ«Ä£À¯ï ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è vÀ¤SÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÇtð UÉƽ¹zÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ, ZÁeïð¶Ãl£ÀÄß zÁR°¸ÀĪÀ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß JgÀqÀ£Éà ¨Áj CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ£À°èqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
164
C.n. ¯Á 98 J¯ïJJA 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 8Š3Š1999
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957gÀrAiÀÄ°è ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¤ªÀøvÀÛ £ÁåAiÀiÁ¢üñÀgÀÄUÀ½UÉ ªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
165
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 11 ¸ÉÃE« 98 ¢£ÁAPÀ 16Š3Š1999
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ°è ºÉ¸Àj¸À¯ÁzÀ C¢üPÀøvÀ ¸ÁQëUÀ¼ÀÄ «ZÁgÀuÁ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀzÀ ªÀÄÄAzÉ ºÁdgÁUÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
166
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¹D¸ÀÄE 4 ¸ÉÃE« 99 ¢£ÁAPÀ 9Š6Š99
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ, 1957gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 11(4) ºÁUÀÆ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 12(1)(J) gÀ£ÀéAiÀÄ ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁUÀĪÀ £ÉÆÃnùUÉ GvÀÛj¸ÀĪÀ ªÀÄÄ£Àß zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £ÉÆÃqÀ®Ä CªÀPÁ±À PÀ°à¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
167
O.M. DPAR 12 SDE 99 dated 23-7-99
Engaging the services of retired Judges as inquiry officers in Departmental Proceedings.
168
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå ¹D¸ÀÄE 17 ¸ÉÃE« 99, ¢£ÁAPÀ 9Š12Š1999
C£À¢üPÀøvÀªÁV UÉÊgÀÄ ºÁdgÁVgÀĪÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ªÀåªÀºÀj¸ÀĪÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ.
169
DzÉñÀ ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 15 ¸ÁE« 99 ¢£ÁAPÀ 14Š3Š2000
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉUÀ¼À°è ªÀÄAqÀ£Á¢üPÁjAiÀiÁV £ÉëĸÀ¯ÁUÀĪÀ E¯ÁSÁ C¢üPÁjUÀ½UÉ ¤ÃqÀ¯ÁUÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ UËgÀªÀzsÀ£ÀªÀ£ÀÄß ºÉaѸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
170
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 8 ¸ÉÃE« 2001Š1 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 29.8.2000
Qæ«Ä£À¯ï £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è «ZÁgÀuÉUÉ M¼À¥ÀlÖ C¥ÀgÁzsÀPÁÌV zÀAqÀ£ÉUÉ UÀÄjAiÀiÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆa
171
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 8 ¸ÉÃE« 2000ŠII ¢£ÁAPÀ: 29.8.2000
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄ «¢ü¹zÀ zÀAqÀ£ÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ªÉÄð£À £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀĪÀÅ «¼ÀA§£ÉAiÀÄ°èlÖ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è CªÀgÀ CªÀiÁ£ÀvÀÛ£ÀÄß ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
172
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 13 ¸ÉÃE« 2000, ¢£ÁAPÀ: 9.10.2000
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀÄ ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°èzÁÝUÀ ²¹Û£À £ÀqÀªÀ½PÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÁægÀA©ü¹, CªÀgÀÄ ¤ªÀøvÀÛgÁzÀ £ÀAvÀgÀ zÀAqÀ£É «¢ü¸ÀĪÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß vÀqÉAiÀÄĪÀ §UÉÎ.
173
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 18 ¸ÉÃE« 2000 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 4.11.2000
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 1957gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 11(2) gÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¯ÉÆÃPÁAiÀÄÄPÀÛ ¸ÀA¸ÉÜUÉ ªÀ»¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
174
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 26 ¸ÉÃE« 2000 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 2.1.2001
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 1957gÀ ¥ÀæPÁgÀ ¸ÀPÀæªÀÄ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ CªÀgÀªÀjUÉ ¥ÀæzÀvÀÛªÁzÀ C¢üPÁgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ZÀ¯Á¬Ä¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
175
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 14 ¸ÉÃE« 99 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 15.1.2001
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀ£À «gÀÄzÀÞ PÀæ«Ä£À¯ï ªÉÆPÀzÀݪÉÄAiÀÄ°è RįÁ¸É ªÀiÁrzÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è CªÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ ªÀiÁqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ªÀiÁUÀð¸ÀÆa
176
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 1 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ; 7.2.2001
ZÀÄ£ÁªÀuÁ PÁAiÀÄðPÀæªÀÄPÁÌV ¤AiÉÆÃf¸À®àlÖ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É ¨sÁgÀvÀ ZÀÄ£ÁªÀuÁ DAiÉÆÃUÀªÀÅ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀ ²¹Û£À C¢üPÁgÀ ªÁå¦ÛAiÀÄ §UÉÎ
177
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 3 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 24.3.2001
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À®Ä ªÀÄAdÆgÁw ¤ÃqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
178
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 19 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 28.6.2001
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀĪÀ£ÀÄß DgÀA©ü¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è, £ÀqɸÀĪÀ°è ºÁUÀÆ CAwªÀÄUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¸À¯ÁVgÀĪÀ PÁ®«ÄwAiÀÄ ¥ÀjμÀÌgÀuÉ PÀÄjvÀÄ
179
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 25 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 1.8.2001
¢ÃWÀðPÁ®¢AzÀ C£À¢üPÀøvÀ UÉÊgÀĺÁdjAiÀÄ°ègÀĪÀ £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¸ÉêÉAiÀÄ°è ªÀÄÄAzÀĪÀgɸÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
180
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 31 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 24.8.2001
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀ£À «gÀÄzÀÞ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è PÁ£ÀÆ£ÀÄ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸À®Ä ªÀÄAdÆgÁw ¤ÃqÀ®Ä C¢üPÁgÀ ºÉÆA¢gÀĪÀ ¥Áæ¢üPÁgÀUÀ¼ÀÄ ªÀÄAdÆgÁw DzÉñÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸ÀªÀÄ¥ÀðPÀªÁV ºÉÆgÀr¸ÀÄwÛ®èªÉA§ §UÉÎ Š ªÀÄgÀĸÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ
181
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 18 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 14.9.2001
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀ£À «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸Á©ÃvÁzÀ DgÉÆÃ¥ÀUÀ½UÉ C£ÀÄUÀÄtªÁV «¢ü¸À§ºÀÄzÁzÀ zÀAqÀ£ÉUÀ¼À PÀÄjvÀÄ
182
Note No. DPAR 876 SRC 2002
Powers to impose penalties on the various categories of posts in Karnataka Government Secretariat
183
¸À.C. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 45 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 4.3.2002
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ £ÀqɸÀĪÀ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉUÀ¼À°è «ZÁgÀuÁ¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÁV ºÁUÀÆ ªÀÄAqÀ£Á¢üPÁjUÀ¼ÁV £ÉêÀÄPÀUÉƼÀÄîªÀ ¤ªÀøvÀÛ £ÁåAiÀiÁ¢üñÀgÀÄUÀ½UÉ ¥ÀæAiÀiÁt ¨sÀvÉå (Conveyance Allowance) ¤ÃqÀĪÀ §UÉÎ.
184
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 47 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 23.3.2002
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqɸÀ®Ä GzÉÝò¹zÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À°è ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¸ÉêÁ «ªÀgÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß £ÀªÀÄÆ¢¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ºÁUÀÆ zÉÆÃμÀgÀ»vÀ DzÉñÀUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ºÉÆgÀr¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
185
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 22 ¸ÉÃE« 2001 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 5.7.2002
¸ÀPÀæªÀÄ £ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ°è Qæ«Ä£À¯ï DgÉÆÃ¥À¢AzÀ RįÁ¸ÉUÉÆAqÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£ÀB ¸ÉêÉUÉ vÉUÉzÀÄPÉÆAqÀ ¸ÀAzÀ¨sÀðzÀ°è CªÀjUÉ ¤ÃqÀ¨ÉÃPÁzÀ ¸Ë®¨sÀåUÀ¼À PÀÄjvÀÄ
186
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 25 ¸ÉÃE« 2002 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 19.10.2002
£ÁåAiÀiÁ®AiÀÄzÀ wÃ¥ÀÅð AiÀiÁªÀÅzÉà ¤AiÀĪÀiÁªÀ½UÀ¼À ¥ÀæPÁgÀ E®èzÉà EzÀÝ ¥ÀPÀëzÀ°è CAvÀºÀ wæð£À «gÀÄzÀÞ ¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ°è ªÉÄîä£À«AiÀÄ£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ ¸ÀÆZÀ£ÉUÀ¼ÀÄ
187
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 2 ¸ÉÃE« 2003 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 6.2.2003
CªÀiÁ£ÀwÛ°èqÀ¯ÁzÀ ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¥ÀÅ£ÀgÁªÀ¯ÉÆÃQ¸À®Ä gÀa¸À¯ÁVzÀÝ ¸À«ÄwAiÀÄ£ÀÄß gÀzÀÄÝ¥Àr¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
188
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 7 ¸ÉÃE« 2003 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 12.5.2003
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀ°è C¥ÀÇtð ªÀiÁ»w zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
189
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå ¹D¸ÀÄE 12 ¸ÉÃE« 2003
¸ÀPÁðgÀzÀ J¯Áè E¯ÁSÉUÀ¼À°è EgÀĪÀ ²¸ÀÄÛ ¥ÀæPÀgÀtUÀ¼À ¥ÀÅ£ÀgÁªÀ¯ÉÆPÀ£É §UÉÎ.
190
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 12 ¸ÉÃE« 2003 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 11.9.2003
¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀgÀ «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀĪÀ£ÀÄß DgÀA©ü¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è £ÀqɸÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è ºÁUÀÆ CAwªÀÄUÉƽ¸ÀĪÀÅzÀgÀ°è «¼ÀA§ªÀ£ÀÄß vÀqÉUÀlÖ®Ä ¤UÀ¢¥Àr¸À¯ÁVgÀĪÀ PÁ®«ÄwAiÀÄ PÀÄjvÀÄ
191
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 10 ¸ÉÃE« 2003 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 12.11.2003
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt, ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ 1957gÀ CrAiÀÄ°è E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉ £ÀqÉAiÀÄÄwÛzÁÝUÀ, ¸ÀPÁðj £ËPÀgÀ£ÀÄ ªÀÄøvÀ£ÁzÁUÀ E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ ªÀÄÄA¢£À PÀæªÀÄzÀ PÀÄjvÀÄ
192
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 17 ¸ÉÃE« 2002 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 24.11.2003
¢£ÀUÀÆ° DzsÁgÀzÀ ªÉÄÃ¯É PÀvÀðªÀå ¤ªÀð»¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ ¹§âA¢AiÀÄ «gÀÄzÀÞ ²¸ÀÄÛ PÀæªÀÄ dgÀÄV¸ÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
193
C.eÁÕ. ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 5 ¸ÉÃE« 2004 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 19.6.2004
PÀ£ÁðlPÀ ¹«¯ï ¸ÉêÁ (ªÀVðÃPÀgÀt ¤AiÀÄAvÀæt ªÀÄvÀÄÛ ªÉÄîä£À«) ¤AiÀĪÀÄUÀ¼ÀÄ 1957gÀ ¤AiÀĪÀÄ 10PÉÌ wzÀÄÝ¥Àr
194
¸ÀÄvÉÆÛÃ¯É ¸ÀASÉå: ¹D¸ÀÄE 1 ¸ÉÃE« 2005 ¢£ÁAPÀ: 9.2.2005
E¯ÁSÁ «ZÁgÀuÉAiÀÄ ¥Àæ¸ÁÛªÀ£É ¸À°è¸ÀĪÀ°è C¥ÀÇtð ªÀiÁ»w/ zÁR¯ÉUÀ¼À£ÀÄß ¸À°è¸ÀÄwÛgÀĪÀ §UÉÎ
195
Circular No. DPAR 1 SDE 2005 date: 9.2.2005
Furnishing incomplete information/ records while recommending for initiating Departmental enquires - regarding
Circular
No.AD 19181-94 SE (Ac)1-56-1, dated: 5-12-1956
Sub:- Procedure in Anti-Corruption cases
In modification of the procedure indicated in the Official Memorandum No.m.580-93/E.A.2-56-1, dated 13th April 1956, where Government propose to pass an original order in disciplinary case files of the Efficiency Audit Department the following revised procedure is brought into force forthwith.
1. The Special Officer, Efficiency Audit may after completion of investigations in a case submit the records of enquiry with the findings and recommendations to the Chief Secretary to Government in the General Administration Department, (2) The General Administration Department will forward it to the Administrative Department concerned for necessary action, except in those extraordinary cases where the issues and the officials involved are such that it is not deemed fit to consult the Administrative Department at all. In such latter cases, the Chief Secretary may take the orders of the Minister in the Administrative Department and Chief Minister, direct. (3) The Administrative Department will examine the report and take necessary disciplinary action promptly as per procedure laid down if it agreed with the report. As and when cases are so disposed of by the Administrative Departments, they should inform the General Administrative Department about the manner of disposal. (4) Where the Administrative Department is not in a position to agree with the report, its comments should come to the General Administration Department, where further action would be considered.
G.O.No.GAD 18 PHS 57 dated 20th March 1957
Sub:- Prompt transmission of appeals of Government Servants with relevant documents.
A Case has recently come to notice where disciplinary action was taken by a Government Officer against a Subordinate officer. The Subordinate officer appealed and on that appeal the Head of the Department was asked by Government to send up all the relevant papers. Inspite of a number of reminders, the papers did not reach Government for a period of nearly two years. Government issued peremptory orders for the submission of the papers.
2. This state of affairs is thoroughly unsatisfactory and showed that the Head of the Department did not realise his responsibility in the matter.
3. Government rightly insist that appeals and representations from Government Servants will reach Government through the proper channel. This, however casts an equal responsibility on the superior officers to see that such appeal papers or representations are transmitted to Government promptly and are not delayed unduly. Such delay may cause irreparable damage to the Government servant concerned and in its turn, may give rise to a crop of direct representations to higher authorities which is determental to administrative discipline and efficiency.
4. It is accordingly impressed on all officers that appeals and representations against orders addressed to higher authorities should be promptly forwarded with all the
relevant documents. Where any authority delays transmission of such papers, serious notice of such delay may have to be taken.
O.M.No.GAD (S-1) 80 RSR 57, dated 9th May 1957
Notifying the dismissal of Government Servants
Under the instructions in force, it has been the practice to notify the dismissals of Government Servants of erstwhile Mysore State in the Mysore Gazette in the following cases, viz:-
(i) When it is necessary to notify to the public of the removal from service of an officer, whether because his appointment was previously gazetted or from any other cause; and
(ii) When it is specially desired to exclude from re-employment in the service of Government, a public servant who has been dismissed for a heinous offence such as fraud or falsification of accounts.
It is now considered that the above procedure should be made uniformly applicable to the whole of the new Mysore State. Therefore, in supersession of all the previous instructions in the matter, it is hereby directed that all cases of dismissals of Government Servants should be referred to the Chief Secretary to the Government in the General Administration Department (Services) every quarter for notifying the same in the Mysore Gazette and for enabling the compilation and forwardal of such notifications to the Heads of Departments, etc.
O.M.No: OSD 2 SMR 57, dated 29th June 1957.
Sub:- Procedure for consulting the Public Service Commission in Disciplinary and other matters.
The following instructions are issued to regulate the procedure to be followed by the Departments of the Secretariat in their dealings with the Mysore Public Service Commission:
1. Whenever opinion of the Public Service Commission is required on a disciplinary matter, the present practice of referring the file itself to the Public Service Commission for opinion and the Commission recording its opinion on the Secretariat file itself is not suitable.
2. In such disciplinary cases the Secretariat files should not be referred unofficially to the Public Service Commission for their advice/opinion; instead of a self-contained letter should be sent together with all papers relating to the Departmental Enquiry, viz., the charge-sheet, the proceedings before the Enquiry Officer including the findings recorded, the documents filed and the report of the Enquiry Officer. The Commission's reply will then be sent to Government by a letter and, therefore, this practice will obviate any difficulty which may otherwise arise in supplying copies of papers asked for by the delinquent Government servant.
3. All references to the Commission in disciplinary cases should be made directly by the Administrative Department concerned by an official letter addressed to the Secretary of the Commission. Every such reference should be accompanied by all relevant papers or copies of such papers. In such cases references to be Public Service Commission need be routed through the General Administration (Services) Department only in cases where
general principles of methods of recruitment, promotion and transfer from one service to another are involved. Under no circumstances should any Secretariat file containing Departmental notes and minutes form part of the records sent to the Commission for advice/opinion.
4. All cases of appointment by promotion to services and posts falling within the purview of the Commission should be shown to the General Administration (Services) Department before consulting the Commission under the relevant provisions of the Mysore Public Service Commission Rules in this behalf.
5. When the Commission has come to conclusion in the matter it shall communicate its recommendations/advice to the Department which makes the reference. When the Department concerned has received the Commission's recommendations/advice and has arrived at its own conclusion as to the orders which should be issued, it shall, before issuing the orders, in cases where general principles arise, consult the General Administration (Services) Departments. When the Department is not prepared to accept the recommendations/advice of the Public Service Commission, the case should be put up by the Secretary of the Administrative Department concerned to the Minister of the portfolio Department concerned and the Chief Minister through the Chief Secretary. If it is decided not to accept the advice of the Commission a second reference to the Public Service Commission may be made.
6. If in any case it becomes necessary eventually not to accept the advice of the Commission, a Council Note should then be prepared and submitted to the portfolio Minister of the Administrative Department concerned and the Chief Minister through the Chief Secretary.
7. If the Council decides to over-rule the advice/recommendation of the Public Service Commission then the reasons for non-acceptance of the advice of the Commission should be communicated to the Public Service Commission.
8. The Commission shall be informed of the action taken on its recommendations by the Administrative Department concerned in all cases (including those relating to the recruitment) which have been referred to the Commission for advice. Ordinarily an endorsement forwarding copies of orders issued by Government in such cases will suffice.
9. As soon as a case is received back from the Commission with its advice, the Secretariat Department concerned should without any delay dispose of the case in conformity with the instructions contained in the Mysore Government Rules of Business and Secretariat instructions.
10. These instructions should be followed strictly.
REVENUE DEPARTMENT
G.O.No.RD 185-RGP 57/2023-26A, dated 17th July 1957.
Departmental enquiries - Instructions for conducting of
According to orders issued by the Bombay Government, Departmental enquiries against Government Servants should be completed within a period of three months, from the date, a decision has been taken to hold such an enquiry, and that if the enquiry could not be completed that time for any reason, orders of Government should be obtained for the extension of the period. This subject was discussed at the Divisional Commissioner's Conference held in January 1957. In the other integrated areas, there is no stipulation of
time. The Divisional Commissioners were of opinion that the proceedure in vogue in Bombay may also be brought into force in the entire State.
Agreeing with the Divisional Commissioners, Government issue the following instructions in the matter of Conducting departmental enquiries in the State.
1. An enquiry should be completed within a period of three months from the date, a decision has been taken to hold such an enquiry.
2. In the case of enquiries held by an officer subordinate to the Deputy Commissioner/ Collector, the Deputy Commissioner/Collector may extend the period by two months.
3. In the case of enquiries conducted by the Deputy Commissioner/Collector, the Divisional Commissioner may extend the period by two months.
4. If further extension of time is considered necessary sanction of Government shall be obtained.
Government Circular No.GAD (S-1)25 SSR 57 dated 13th September 1957
Sub:- Anti-Corruption cases - Punishment.
In an anti-corruption case in which a Sub-Registrar, a Clerk, an Attender and a Peon were involved and the evidence established that (a) the Sub-Registrar had taken a bribe directly in one case and clouded in the taking of a bribe in the second case, (b) the clerk had taken bribe directly in one case, (c) the peon had actively participated in the first case of bribery, and (d) the attender had directly received the bribe in the second case, the recommendation that the head of the office and clerk be reduced to a lower stage of the time-scale that the attender be removed from service and the peon compulsorily retired was accepted and orders issued accordingly.
2. The case came to notice recently on a review petition. The Chief Minister has observed on this case as follows:-
"I very much wanted to revise the order, But in view of the orders, dated 12th January 1956 and 14th September 1956, I do not want to disturb them. There should be finality. Yet I would like to make an observation. While the more educated and responsible officials like the Sub-Registrar and the clerk from whom, in view of their superior status better moral conduct is expected are punished by lowering their salaries, these two poor possibly illiterate officials, the attender and the peon, are so heavily punished by being dismissed with service. I feel it would have been more equitable and just if the two educated officials the Sub-Registrar and the clerk, had been dismissed and the peon and attender had their pay lowered. That I feel would be maintaining better standards of meeting out justice. I wish this is accepted in future.
3. In bringing these observations to your notice it is requested that the authority awarding punishment should see that the punishment is not only commensurate with the offence but bears a relation also to the relative degrees of responsibility and sense of duty which officials at various levels are expected to display.
O.M.NO.GAD (OM) 9 SMR 57, dated 12th December 1957
Sub:- Procedure for submission of Representations by Government Servant.
Government is pleased to issue the following instructions in regard to submission of representations by Government Servants in respect of any matters pertaining to their service and in respect of any disciplinary matters or orders affecting their conditions of service. Provision is made for an appeal by the Government Servant under Rules 18 to 22 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1957. Representations should be addressed to the authority competent to entertain the appeal and not to other authorities.
2. All representations should be concise, set out the grounds relied upon by the Government servant and clearly specify the reliefs sought. As a second representation on the same subject will not be entertained, it will be in the interest of the Government servant to set out all relevant grounds and to mention all the reliefs which has seeks, in his representations.
3. Any Government servant who has a grievance from which he seeks relief, must send in his representation in his own name. Joint representations by more than one Government servant will not be considered. This bar does not apply to representations made by recognised Service Associations in accordance with their conditions of recognitions.
4. The representations should invariable be accompanied by a copy of the order appealed against, if any.
5. The representation should be sent through the official superior of the Government servant concerned, who should forward the representation with the relevant papers and his comments, if any, without delay, to the higher authorities, except in the circumstances mentioned in para 9 below.
6. An appeal or representation should be submitted within three months of the order appealed against. An appeal or representation submitted beyond that period will only be entertained at the discretion of the Government, on Government being satisfied that there were adequate reasons for not submitting the representations within time.
7. Where Government has already passed on order on a representation, a fresh representation on the same subject will not be entertained, unless the representation on the face of it discloses new grounds not before Government when the previous order was passed and adequate reasons for not placing those grounds before Government at that time. Any such representations received will be merely recorded and no action will be taken thereon.
8. An Officer who receives the representation from a subordinate office will transmit the papers to proper authorities, with his comments and with the relevant records if any, in his possession, with the least possible delay.
9. The representation should, however, be withheld in the following cases.
(i) It is time-barred and sufficient reasons are not assigned for the delay in submitting the representation.
(ii) A copy of other order appealed against is not annexed to the representation.
(iii) A representation is debarred under paras 3 & 7.
The fact that a representation has been withheld and the reasons thereof shall be communicated to the Government servant concerned except where the representations is withheld under clause (iii) above.
10. The representation received from a Government servant should be forwarded by his immediate superior officer through the official channel. The practice sometimes adopted
of handling back the representations to the aggrieved officer himself with the remarks of the higher officer, for being taken personally to the higher authority, is not correct and should cease. All noting on representations by officers at all levels and in the Secretariat is confidential and should not be communicated to unauthorised persons.
11. The Government servant who after having made a representation does not receive an order thereon within a period of two months, shall be entitled to send copies of his representation directly with a copy of such communication to the authority through whom the representation was originally addressed. Where the advance copy received does not show that proper authorities at lower levels have been approached for securing necessary relief, no action need be taken on the representation. Where, however, the advance copy indicates that relief from the appropriate authorities at lower levels has been sought in vain, the authority who receives the representations should take prompt action to get the relevant records and pass suitable orders in the case.
12. The authority who withhold a representation shall, every three months, send a statement of representations withheld by him, to the authority to whom the representations withheld were addressed.
13. These instructions are issued in supersession of all previous rules, orders and instructions on this subject. The procedure prescribed in these instructions shall, save as otherwise provided in any rules made under the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, be applicable to all representations pending on the date of issue of these instructions.
Official Memorandum No.GAD(OM) 3 CAR 57 dated 14th December 1957
Sub:- Procedural instructions regarding the holding of Departmental Enquiries under the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1957.
The procedure to be follwed before an order of reduction to a lower post or time-scale or to a lower stage in a time-scale, compulsory retirement before completion of the prescribed number of years of qualifying service, removal or dismissal is passed against a Government servant under rule 8 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, subject of the exceptions mentioned in rule 14, is prescribed in rule 11 of those rules. Neglect in the due observance of the provisions of the rule is liable to vitiate the whole proceedings and the ultimate order passed therein. It may often happen that though on merits on order of punishment may be fully justified, it may have to be set aside an account of some technical defect or irregularity committed in the conduct of the inquiry. This may often enable a guilty party to escape punishment as also cause considerable financial loss to Government. The following instructions are therefore issued for the guidance of officers who may have occasion to hold an inquiry under the above mentioned rule. Before holding an inquiry such officer is requested to go through these instructions carefully and adhere to them:-
1. Preliminary enquiry:- (a) Before commencing and departmental enquiry against a Government servant with regard to a disciplinary matter, it is necessary that thenar should be sufficient evidence gathered by way of preliminary enquiry and the authority competent to order the enquiry should be satisfied that there is sufficient prima-facie evidence to start disciplinary proceedings against the Government servant concerned. This preliminary enquiry may be made by any officer under whose administrative control the officer alleged to be at fault is working (or was working at the time the acts complained of were
committed), but the decision to hold the enquiry can only be taken by the authority competent to hold the enquiry under the rules.
(b) Any officer can ask for an explanation from a subordinate officer in respect of any matter pertaining to his duties and it will often be advisable before initiating a departmental enquiry to obtain the explanation as, after obtaining the explanation, the reporting authority may feel that there is no case to initiate departmental proceedings at all. The asking of such an explanation is, however, not compulsory and the authority competent to order the investigation, will have to decide, according to the circumstances of each case, whether such an explanation should be obtained before issue of a chargesheet or not.
2. Issue of Charge-Sheet:- (a) Once the authority competent to appoint the enquiry officer is satisfied that a departmental enquiry is necessary, or he is directed by higher authority to hold a departmental enquiry the first higher authority to hold a departmental enquiry the first step will be to appoint an Enquiry Officer (if a higher authority has directed the officer to hold the enquiry himself, he himself will be the Enquiry Officer). The Enquiry Officer should frame a charge-sheet containing:-
(i) definite charge or charges,
(ii) under each charge the grounds on which that charge is based, and
(iii) any other circumstances which it is proposed to take into consideration in passing orders in the case.
Each charge should be drawn up clearly and precisely and care should be taken to avoid vagueness.
(b) The charge-sheet should conclude with the following formula:-
"Please show cause why suitable disciplinary action should not be taken against you on the charges mentioned above."
"You are required herewith to put in any written statement you may desire to submit in your defence by …………….. (the date to be specified). Please also state whether you desire any oral enquiry and/or to be heard in person. In case you desire any oral enquiry to be held please specify the witnesses you desire to cross-examine and the witnesses you desire to examine in your defence. Your attention is invited in this connection to rule 11(6) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1957. In case you fail to put in your written statement by the above date, the undersigned may proceed with the enquiry on the basis that you have no defence to offer".
3. Written statement in defence-The Enquiry Officer should fix a reasonable time within which the written statement must be filed. In dealing with requests if any, for further time, by the accused Government servant, the Enquiry Officer Will consider whether the accused Government servant is sufficiently active in the preparation of his defence and whether the time asked for is really necessary. An accused Government servant must have reasonable facilities for the preparation of his defence, and subject to this condition, it is the Enquiry Officer's responsibility to complete the Departmental proceedings with the greatest despatch and submit his report to the appropriate authority. Normally, the maximum period for which an officer can be kept under suspension is six months and, as within this period, final orders have to be passed, it would be reasonable to except the Government servant concerned to put in his defence within three to five weeks according to the nature of the case. These limits are only ment for general guidance and are not to be taken as absolute limits. In simple and straight forward cases, even three
weeks may not be necessary, while a case which involves study of columinous record, not in the Government servant's own office, a longer period than five weeks may be necessary.
4. Request for an oral inquiry and/or to be heard in person:- (a) If within the prescribed time, or such further time as the Enquiry Officer may give, no written statement in defence is filed and no request in writing is made for oral enquiry or for being heard in person, the Enquiry Officer may either record his findings forthwith without holding any further enquiry, or, at his discretion, enquire into the matter further to satisfy himself about the truth of the charges. An enquiry must be held where the Government servant asks for it, or has expressed a desire to be heard in person, or having regard to the written statement in defence or the statement made by the Government servant himself when he is heard in person, a further enquiry is necessary to decide the truth of the charges.
(b) Except in respect of very straight forward cases, the Enquiry Officer will always find it useful to examine the Government servant concerned orally, irrespective of whether the Government servant desires to be heard in person or not.
5. Record of evidence:- (a) At the oral enquiry evidence should be heard on charges which are not admitted or which, though admitted, the Enquiry Officers desires to investigate. The enquiry, however, should not extend to matters not mentioned in the charge-sheet.
(b) The evidence in support of the charges should be recorded first and the accused Government Servant given an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses.
(c) The evidence of each witness should be recorded in the form of a narrative and when the evidence is completed it should be read over to the witness, and, if necessary explained to him in the language in which it was given. If the witness denied the correctness of any part of the evidence when it is read over to him, the Enquiry Officer may either carry out the correction or, instead of correcting the evidence, make memorandum of the objection and add such remarks as he thinks necessary. Then, the statement shall be signed by the Enquiry Officer. Copies of such evidence as are required by the accused Government servant may be permitted to be taken by him or at the discretion of the Enquiry Officer supplied to him.
6. Enforcing the attendance of witnesses:- (a) The Officer holding the enquiry has no power to enforce the attendance of any non-official witnesses. As regards official witnesses he should be able to procure their presence either by writing to them direct or to their superior officers at appropriate levels. Normally, the request to call an official witness, when his evidence is relevant, should not be rejected. When, however, it appears that the request is frivolous or vexatious or it is made with a view to prolong unnecessarily the enquiry, the request should be refused and the reasons there of recorded in writing.
(b) The above instructions for recording the evidences of witnesses apply equally to the record of the examination of the accused Government servant himself.
7. Expenses of witnesses:- Except where they are official witnesses whose evidence is, in the opinion of the Enquiry Officer, relevant the expenses of witnesses called by the Enquiry Officer at the instance of the person charged should be borne by the latter. Before asking such a person to appear before him as a witness, the Enquiry Officer may require the person charged to deposit the necessary expenses with him. The expenses of other witnesses called to give evidence should be borne by Government. As far as official witnesses are concerned, their appearance at the enquiry will form part of their duty.
8. Inspection of documents by the Government servant concerned:- The Enquiry Officer should give every reasonable facility to the accused Government servant to inspect
any documents or records necessary for the purpose of preparing his defence. Such inspection shold be arranged in the presence of a responsible Government servant to ensure that the records are not tampered with in any manner. The documentary evidence in the custody of the accused should be produced by him along with his written statement. If it is produced later, the Enquiry Officer may admit or reject it in his discretion. Normally such evidence should not be rejected unless it has the effect of unnecessarily prolonging the enquiry and the accused Government servant has not offered a reasonable excuse for not having produced the evidence earlier.
9. Enquiry Officer's responsibility:- It is the Enquiry Officer's responsibility to arrive at the truth of falsity of the charges against the Government servant. For this purpose, it is his responsibility to put whatever questions as may be necessary both to the witnesses examined in support of the charge and to the withnesses produced by the accused Government servant.
10. Prohibition against appearance by Lawyers:- Lawyer should not be allowed to appear in departmental enquiries, whether for the accused Government servant or against the accused Government servant. Rule 28 of the Classification Control and Appeal Rule refers.
11. Submission by the accused of another written statement:-After all the evidence has been heard, the person charged shall, if he so desires, put in a further written statement in his defence and also explain his defence orally to the Enquiry Officer.
12. Drawing up of the findings by the Enquiry Officer:- (a) On completion of the enquiry, including the personal examination of the accused Government servant, if any, as the case may be, the enquiry officer shall record his findings in respect of each charge, with reasons thereof, and forward the proceedings to the authority appointing him.
(b) The proceedings, forwarded shall contain,-
(i) the charges framed against the Government servant alongwith the grounds of charge;
(ii) written statement filed in defence, if any;
(iii) a sufficient record of the evidence, given during the oral enquiry as also the documentary evidence;
(iv) a memorandum of the points urged by the Government servant concerned during the personal hearing, if any;
(v) a statement of the finding of the Enquiry Officer on the different charges and the grounds therefor; and
(vi) the penalty recommended.
13. Provisional conclusion:- The authority competent to impose punishment, on perusal of the proceedings, shall come to a provisional conclusion in regard to the penalty to be imposed.
14. Giving of a second or further opportunity to the person charged:- If this penalty is any one of the penalties mentioned in clauses (v), (vi), (vii) and (viii) of rule 8 of the Rules, the person charged should be supplied with a copy of the report of the enquiring authority and be called upon by t he competent authority or such other officer authorised by it in this behalf to show cause within a reasonable time, not ordinarily less than one week, or exceeding one month, against the particular penalty proposed to be inflicted.
Any representation in this behalf submitted by the person charged shall be duly taken into consideration before final orders are passed.
15. Consultation with the Public Service Commission:- (a) Where the authority to impose punishment is Government it is, save in exceptional cases, necessary, before passing an order, to consult the Public Service Commission. In asking for the advice of the Commission, the complete records of the case, namely, the records mentioned in para 12(b), the show cause notice issued under para 14 and the Government servant's reply, if any, should be forwarded to the Commission. It would not be necessary to examine the case in great detail at this stage, as Government would take a final decision only after receiving the advice of the Public service Commission. For the same reason, unless the Minister concerned has specifically so directed, it is ordinarily undesirable and unnecessary to obtain the orders of the Minister concerned at this stage.
(b) On receipt of the advice of the Commission, the papers should be submitted to the Minister concerned for orders.
(c) Where, for any reason, it is felt that the Commission's advice cannot be accepted, the papers should be referred to the General Administration Department. The General Administration Department will either take up the case again with the Commission or, in case it is felt necessary to deviate from the advice of the Commission, submit the case to the Council of Ministers for final orders.
16. Drawing up of the final order:- (a) The final order containing the decision of the authority competent to impose the penalty should be a self-contained order. The order should set out briefly the relevant facts, findings of the Enquiry Officer, the advice of the Commission and Government's decision thereon with reasons in brief for any departure from the findings of the Enquiry Officer or advice of the Commission, and it should be signed by an officer authorised to sign orders on behalf of Government under the Rules of Business, if Government issues the order or in other cases by the authority competent to impose the particular punishment. A copy of this order should be supplied to the accused Government servant.
(b) A copy of the letter of the Public Services Commission containing its advice may, if applied for, be supplied to the accused Government servant.
17. Cases in which procedure detailed above need not be follwed:- The procedure laid down in rules 11, 12 and 13 of the Rules may not be followed and all or any of the above instructions may be waived in the following cases:-
(i) when the order of punishment, i.e., reduction, compulsory retirement, removal or dismissal, is based on facts which have led to the conviction of the person charged in a criminal court. In such cases the order of punishment may be passed on the strength of the facts as disclosed in the criminal case;
(ii) where the Disciplinary Authority is satisfied for reasons to be recorded in writing that it is not reasonably practicable to follow the procedure prescribed in the said rule, e.g., where the Government servant has absented himslef from duty and the address of the Government servant is not known; or
(iii) where the Governor is satisfied that in the interest of the security of the State, it is not expedient to follow such procedure, the Disciplinary Authority may consider the circumstances of the case and pass such orders thereon as it deems fit:
Provided that the Commission shall be consulted before passing such orders in any case in which such consultation is necessary.
18. Procedure to be followed in cases of minor punishments:- It is not necessary, to follow the elaborate procedure detailed in the preceding paragraphs in respect of penalties mentioned in clauses (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of rule 8 of the Rules. But before imposing any such punishment, the Government servant should be given a reasonable opportunity to make a representation against the action proposed to be taken. In particular, it is not necessary to give the Government servant, in such cases a notice to show cause against the proposed punishment after he had an opportunity to answer the allegations aganist him.
19. Suspension:- (a) Placing of a Government servant under suspension under rule 10 of the Rules where an enquiry into his conduct is contemplated, or is pending, would imply the commencement of a departmental inquiry in a disciplinary action. This Action shall not require the giving of a prior notice and obtaining the explanation of the Government servant concerned.
(b) The purpose in placing an officer under suspension is to keep him away from a position where he can interfere with conduct of the enquiry or temper with the documentary or oral evidence in any manner, or, where, having regard to the nature of the charges against him, it is felt that it would be unsafe to continue to vest in him the powers of his post.
(c) Where an officer is placed under suspension, it is particularly necessary to expedite the enquiry proceedings and to complete the departmental enquiry as early as possible.
(d) The authority competent to suspend a Government servant, while issuing the orders of suspension should invariably mention in the said order the subsistence allowance which shold be paid to the Government servant concerned under the rules.
(e) A Government servant should not be suspended pending enquiry as a measure of punishment. Where, however an officer has been suspended pending enquiry into his conduct, the following courses would be open at the conclusion of the inquiry:-
Where the authority competent to impose any punishment-
(i) makes an order fully exonerating or acquitting him, the period during which he was under suspension pending the inquiry shall be deemed to be period of duty and the Government servant shall be entitled to full pay and allowances as if he had not been placed under suspension:
(ii) makes an order imposing any penalty, other than a penalty of compulsory retirement, removal from service or dismissal from service, the Government servant shall be paid for the period of suspension such proportion of his pay and allowances not less than subsistences allowance payable under the rules as the said authority may in its discretion specify; and where no such proportion is specified, the Government servant shall be paid the maximum subsistence allowance admissible under the rules relating to grant of subsistence allowance and the period of suspension shall count as duty unless the said authority has otherwise directed:
(iii) makes an order imposing the penalty of compulsory retirement, removal from service or dismissal, shall be paid for the period of suspension such proportion of his pay and allowances as the said authority may, in its discretion specify and where no such proportion is specified the maximum subsistence allowance admissible under the rules relating to grant of
subsistence allowance and the period of suspension shall not count as duty for any purpose unless the said authority has otherwise directed.
20. Cases of alleged criminal misconduct of Government Servants:- The following procedure should normally be adopted in cases of alleged criminal misconduct of Government Servants:-
(a) As soon as sufficient evidence is available for the purpose in the course of investigation in case of misconduct, whether such investigation is conducted departmentally, through the Anti-Corruption Department or through the Police, action should be taken under the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 or other appropriate disciplinary rules, and disciplinary proceedings should be initiated forthwith. Such departmental proceedings need not interfere with the Police investigation, which may be continued, where necessary. After the departmental proceedings are concluded, the penalty, if any, imposed as a result thereof, the question of prosecution should be considered in the light of such material as may have become available as a result of the investigation.
(b) In suitable cases, criminal proceedings should thereafter be initiated. Before initiating such proceedings advice on the evidence should be obtained from Government's legal advisers, including in sufficiently important cases from the Advocate-General. Where the conduct of a Government servant discloses a grave offence of a criminal nature, criminal prosecution should be the rule and not the exception. Where the competent authority is satisfied that there is no criminal prosecution, which can be reasonably sustained against such an officer prosecution should not, of course, be resorted to, but prosecution should not be avoided merely on the ground that the case might lead to an acquittal.
(c) Should the decision of the trial court or the appellate court, as the case may be, lead to the acquittal of the accused, it maybe necessary to review the decision taken earlier as a result of the departmental proceedings a point to be taken into account in such review would be whether the legal proceedings and the departmental proceedings covered precisely the same grounds.
If they did not, and the legal proceedings related only to one or two charges, i.e., not the entire field of departmental proceedings, it may not be found necessary to alter the decision already taken. Moreover, it should be remembered that while the court may have held that the facts of the case did not amount to an offence under the law, it may well be that the competent authority in the departmental proceedings might hold that the Government servant was guilty of a departmental misdemeanor and he had not behaved in the manner in which a person of his position was expected to behave.
O.M.No.GAD(S-1) 80 RSR 57, dated 4th January 1958.
Sub: Preparation and submission of quarterly returns of dismissed Government Servants.
In continuation of the instructions issued in Official Memorandum No.GAD (S-1) 80-RSR-57, dated the 9th May 1957, it is directed that particulars as noted below be furnished in the prescribed quarterly return in respect of dismissed persons should be-included in the prescribed return only after the statutory appeal, if any, preferred by him is disposed of; or after the time prescribed in the rules for preferring the appeal has elapsed and no appeal has been preferred by him.
1. Name, Father's Name and Educational Qualification.
2. Date and Place of Birth
3. Place of Residence
4. Marks of identification
5. Post held
6. Reasons for dismissal.
2. Nil returns should also be sent
O.M.No.GAD(S-1) 80, RSR 57, dated: 4th February 1958
Sub:- Quarterly statements of dismissals of Government Servants-forwardal of for notification.
Instructions regarding preparation and submission of quarterly returns of dismissed Government Servants have been issued in Official Memorandum No.GAD (S-1) 80, RSR 57, dated 9th May 1957 and 4th January 1958. It is noticed that statements of dismissals of Government Servants are not being submitted to Government punctually. As even 'nil' returns have to be sent it is directed that the returns should be submitted to Chief Secretary to Government so as to reach on the 5th of the following quarter punctually.
Circular No. GAD 11 GEI 58, dated 30th May 1958.
Confidential Records - entries.
Attention is invited to the Chief Secretary's circular No.GAD 11-GEI-58, dated 15th May 1958, wherein it has been impressed that copies of orders regarding action taken against Government Servants in disciplinary proceedings should be placed in their confidential records. Apart from penalties actually imposed, there are case in which orders are passed or directions are given, which have a bearing on the transfers or promotion of the Government servant concerned or on the capacity of the Government servant. It is essential that even though such directions or orders may not amount to a punishment, copies thereof should be kept in the respective confidential records and while considering proposals for transfer or promotion; the confidential record of the particular Government servant should be invariably referred to.
O.M.No: GAD 27 SSR 58, dated 18th October 1958
Sub:- Procedure in Disciplinary cases - avoidance of delay.
It has been brought to the notice of Government that on may occasions the Departments do not send at once all the relevant records pertaining to disciplinary cases referred to the Public Service Commission with the result that it becomes impossible for the Commission to communicate their recommendations without delay. The urgency in the disposal of disciplinary cases need hardly be emphasised. Attention of the Secretariat Department is invited to para 13 of O.M.No:GAD (OM) 3 CAR 57, dated the 14th
December 1957, and it is requested that as laid down in that para, the following documents are invariably sent to the Commission, when it is consulted in disciplinary cases:-
(i) the charges framed against the Government servant along with the grounds of charge;
(ii) written statement filled in defence, if any;
(iii) a sufficient record of the evidence given during the oral enquiry as also the documentary evidence;
(iv) a memo of the points urged by the Government servant concerned during the personal hearing, if any;
(v) statement of the findings of the Enquiry Officer on the different charges and the grounds therefor;
(vi) the penalty recommended;
(vii) the show cause notice issued to the Government servant and his reply thereto;
provided that in cases of minor penalties where as per rule 12 of the M.C.S. (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, no departmental enquiry is held, the question of sending the records mentioned at (iii), (iv) and (v) above would not arise.
The service book (or history of services in the case of a Gazetted Officer) and the confidential record of the Government servant should also be sent to the Commission in all cases since they are necessary in determining the quantum of penalty.
The Departments are also requested to see that in cases where a Departmental Enquiry is held and the Government servant in reply to the show cause notice states that he has not been provided with adequate opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses or that there has been some flaw in the conduct of the enquiry, etc., the points raised are examined and their remarks on them made available to the commission whenever it is consulted. Some of these points may raise vital issues visa is the validity of the enquiry itself and it is necessary that the Commission is posted with full information with regard to them before it can give its opinion.
The Departments are requested to follow these instructions scrupulously.
Circular. No: GAD (S.1) 38 SSR 58, dated: 30th October 1958.
Sub:- Misappropriation of Government Money - Enquiry - procedure for.
In a case of misappropriation of government dues, a clarification has been sought, whether immediate steps are to be taken for recovery of the amount and a departmental enquiry started against the delinquent, simultaneously with the launching of a criminal prosecution.
2. Attention is invited, in this connection to the procedure laid down in para 20 of Official Memorandum No. GAD 3 CAR 57, dated 14th December 1957, wherein it has been prescribed the departmental enquiry should first be completed with the greatest despatch before initiating criminal proceedings. Therefore, in misappropriation cases, the proper procedure is first to start a departmental enquiry and to take steps for recovery of the amount from the delinquent, if he is found to have misappropriated the amount.
3. If, after completing Departmental proceedings, it is considered that the case is suitable for proceedings against the delinquent in a Criminal Court, such action should be taken. Once the criminal proceedings have been initiated no steps for recovery of the amount should be taken, until the criminal case is decided. Though there is no legal bar for recovery of the amount pending a criminal trial, it has been recognised as a rule of equity that nothing should be done during the pendency of a criminal trial that would prejudice the defence of the accused.
4. Further, in any case where criminal proceedings have already been initiated before the departmental enquiry has been completed, the departmental proceedings should also be stayed until the disposal of the criminal case, if the subject matter of such proceedings is also the subject matter of a charge against the delinquent in a criminal Court. Such cases should not normally occur hereafter.
ADDENDUM
Sub:- Criminal misconduct - Government Servants - Procedure to be followed.
Several doubts have been expressed regarding the exact procedure to be followed in cases of criminal misconduct committed by Government Servants. The following clarifications are issued in partial modification of Instruction 20 of Procedural Instructions issued in O.M.No.GAD (OM) 3 CAR 57, dated 14-12-57 and Circular No.GAD (S.1) 38 SSR 58, dated 30th October 1958, namely:-
1. Where officers are trapped or caught red handed while accepting illegal gratification, the investigation should be continued and completed and regular charge-sheet in the Court of the concerned Special Judge should be filed.
2. Where cases are initiated by the police either SUO MOTU or at the instance of the Head of a Department, if on completion of the investigation, it is found that the evidence collected is not sufficient so as to warrant a conviction in a Court of Law, the Anti-Corruption Department or the Police Department, as the case may be, should consider and move the concerned Court for obtaining the relevant summary for dropping the proceedings. After obtaining such a summary, the records of investigation should be forwarded to the Head of the Department who should decide about the sufficiency of the material for initiating a departmental enquiry under the M.C.S.(CCA) Rules, 1957 and take action accordingly.
3. Where departmental enquiries have been started without reference to the police, such enquiries should be continued and completed according to the rules. If at any stage of the enquiry, the Disciplinary Authority considers that the Offences disclosed are so grave that a prosecution in a Court of Law is essential in the interest of administration, then steps should be taken to launch regular prosecution and the Departmental enquiry should be kept in abeyance.
4. It is impressed on all concerned that delay in the institution of criminal prosecution not only frustrates the object of the prosecution but may possibly affect the credit to be attached to the evidence that will be adduced in support of the prosecution. Delayed prosecutions are looked upon with suspicion by Courts. It is essential therefore that prosecution should normally be conceived at the earliest stage as soon as the offence is committed and detected. If in any case there is delay in launching a prosecution, then such cases should be continued only departmentally.
5. Where a prosecution ends in an order of acquittal, then the question of Departmental enquiry does not arise if the accused has been acquitted on merits. If the order of acquittal is on some technical ground, then the propriety of starting a Departmental enquiry should be considered on the merits of each case after a careful scrutiny of the judgement.
Circular No.GAD 36 DIF(Int) 58, dated: 15th November 1958
Sub:- States Reorganisation-Provisions as to Services-Procedure in respect of disciplinary matters.
I am directed to forward herewith for information a copy of letter number 21/3/58 SR (S) dated 30th October 1958, received from the Secretary to Government of India Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi, on the subject mentioned above. These instructions may be followed in dealing with cases of disciplinary proceedings initiated prior to 1st November 1956.
Copy of the letter No.21/3/58 SR(S) dated 30th October 1958 from Shri D.D.Gothi, Under Secretary to Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, to the Additional Secreatry to the Government of Mysore, General Administration Department, (Integration), Bangalore.
I am directed to refer to the State Government's letter No.GAD (INT) 36/DIF/58, dated the 17th May 1958 in which they asked for the views of the Government of India regarding the procedure to be adopted in dealing with:-
(i) appeals or petitions for reinstatement preferred after 1st November 1956 by officials who were dismissed removed or compulsorily retired before 1st November 1956 while serving in areas which now form part of the State of Mysore.
(ii) pending departmental proceedings in which final orders have not been passed;
(iii) the appeals or petitions preferred prior to 1st November 1956 by persons compulsorily retired, removed or dismissed;
(iv) the cases, in which departmental enquiris are to be held against the officials in respect of acts of misconduct while serving in areas forming part of States of Bombay, Andhra Pradesh and Madras.
2. The Government of India have considered the matter and they are of the view that a person who was dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired by a competent authority before 1st November 1956 was not one who held a post within the meaning of section 116 of the S.R.Act 1956, and as such cannot be alloted to any State under section 115 of the said Act. In the circumstances, the Government of India consider that appeals or petitions from such persons preferred before or after 1st November 1956 should be disposed of by the principal successor State. In case it is ultimately decided to reinstate the Government servant the question of his allocation will be decided in consultation with the State Governments concerned.
3. The procedure followed by the State Government in the case of appeals or petitions of officers of the former States of Mysore and Coorg is correct.
4. As regards pending departmental proceedings and appeals and petitions, a distinction may be drawn between:-
(a) cases where an officer held a post or would be deemed to have held a post under any State immediately before 1st November 1956 and
(b) cases where the officer did not hold any post and is also not deemed to have held any post immediately before 1st November 1956.
In the case of (a) above, the proceedings may be continued by the appropriate authority of the State to which such officer has been allotted or is deemed to have been allotted by general or special orders of the Central Government, whereas in the case of (b) the enquiry will have to be continued by the authority in the principal successor state.
Pending appeals and petitions may also be disposed of accordingly.
5. As regards cases in which departmental enquiries have to be held against officials in respect of acts of mis-conduct while serving in areas which form part of States of Bombay, Madhya Pradesh and Madras, I am to invite your attention to this Ministry's letter No.F6/12/58-SR(S), dated 22nd August 1958 (copy enclosed)
Copy of the letter No.F.6/12/58SR(S), dated the 22nd August 1958 from Shri D.D.Gothi, Under Secretary to the Govt. of India to the Secretary to the Government of Mysore Education Department, Bangalore.
Sub:- Departmental enquiry against Shri M.S.Mahamood III Grade Clerk (under suspension) of the Office of the Director of Public Instruction, Hyderabad now transferred to the office of the Deputy Director of Public Instruction, Raichur.
Circular No.21/3/58-SR(S), dated New Delhi-1, 30th October 1958
Copy with a copy of letter replied to is forwarded to the Governments of Andhra Pradesh, Bombay, Bihar, Kerala, Madras, Madya Pradesh, Rajasthan and West Bengal.
I am directed to refer to your letter No.ED 29 SES 57 dated the 1st May 1958 on the above subject, and to say that the question raised therein has been examined in consultation with the Law Ministry here. The Government of India consider that the best course will be for the Government of Mysore to appoint one of their own officers to do the enquiry, who may, if found necessary to go to Andhra Pradesh for the purpose of conducting the enquiry. I am to add that an alternative method would be to cancel the provisional allocation of Shri Mahmood to Mysore so that he may be brought over to Andhra Pradesh for completion of the enquiry by the Government of that State. This course is however, of doubtful legal validity, and would also not be consistent with the general position indicated in para 4 of this Ministry's Circular letter No.6/3/58-SR(S) dated 8th March 1958.
In the opinion of the Government of India, there should be no difficulty in following the first alternative, namely, that the Government of Mysore should appoint one of their own officer who should, if necessary visit Hyderabad to complete the enquiry. I am accordingly to suggest this procedure.
O.M.No.GAD(S-1) 86 RSR 58, dated 21st November 1958
Sub:- Disciplinary action against Government Servants.
Sub-rule (9) of Rule 11 of the Mysore Civil Services (C.C&A) Rules 1957, provides that the disciplinary authority shall, if it is not Inquiring authority, consider the record of
the inquiry and record its findings on each charge. Further sub-rule 10(1) requires that if the disciplinary authority, having regard to its findings on the charges, is of the opinion that any of the penalties specified in clauses (v) to (viii) of Rule 8 should be imposed, it shall give to the accused Government servant a notice stating the action proposed to be taken in regard to him and asking him to show cause, within a specified time, why the action proposed to be taken against him should not be taken. The disciplinary authority is required, at the same time, to furnish to the Government servant a copy of the Inquiring authority's report and, where the disciplinary authority is not the Inquiring authority, a statement of its findings together with brief reasons for disagreement, if any with the findings of the Inquiring authority. Regulation 5 of the Mysore Public Service Commission (Consultation) Regulations, 1958, classifies the cases in which the disciplinary authority should consult the Commission before passing final orders. The question has been raised whether it is necessary under the provisions of the Constitution that at the conclusion of the enquiry, the disciplinary authority should record its findings on each charge before issuing a show cause notice on the delinquent Government servant and whether the Public Service Commission should be consulted only once before passing the final orders after receipt of reply to the show cause notice or twice. Once before issuing the show cause notice to the accused Government servant and again before passing final orders in the matter. It is hereby clarified that the disciplinary authority should record its provisional findings on each charge before calling on the Government servant to show cause why any of the penalties specified in clauses (v) to (viii) of Rule 8 of the Mysore Civil Services (C.C.& A) Rules should not be imposed on him and that a reference to the Public Service Commission where necessary, should be made only after service of show cause notice on the accused Government servant and receipt of his reply, if any, thereto. The disciplinary authorities are requested to bear this requirement under the provisions of the Constitution as any lapse on their part is likely to vitiate the proceedings in the cases of disciplinary matters.
CIRCULAR No.GAD(S-1) 35 SSR 58, Bangalore, dated 8th January 1959
Issue instructions regarding the Departmental Proceedings against Government Servants for misconduct.
A number of instances have come to the notice Government in which the Departmental proceedings taken against Government Servants have been quashed by the High Court on the Ground that the proceedings were procedurally defective. While this is especially true of departmental enquiries held before the issue of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, it is observed that even in some of the enquiries held after the issue of these Rules, the enquiries have not been held in conformity with the procedure laid down therein. The common defects noticed in the large majority of cases are as under:-
1) failure to frame specific charges,
2) recording of evidence of witnesses in support of the charges, in the absence of the delinquent Government servant, of merely giving him an opportunity to cross-examine the witnesses without first recording his evidence as against the delinquently,
3) failure to comply with reasonable requests for inspecting the relevant records.
4) failure to furnish the reasons for the findings on the charges.
5) the imposition of a major penalty without giving a show cause notice to the official concerned, as required under Article 311 (2) of the Constitution, and
6) failure to furnish a copy of the report of the enquiry to the delinquent alongwith the show cause notice.
2. It would appear from these defects that Enquiry Officers do not study the instructions on the subject. This is inexcusable. The attention of all officers is invited to Official Memorandum No.GAD 3 CAR 57 dated 14th December 1957, which contains detailed instructions regarding the manner of holding Departmental enquires. In particular, the disciplinary authorities should bear in mind that failure to comply with the provisions of Article 311(2) of the Constitution, which requires that a reasonable opportunity to show cause against the action proposed to be taken in regard to him, should be given in any case in which a Government servant is proposed to be dismissed or removed or reduced in rank, will vitiate the entire proceedings. As provided in Rule 11(8) to (12) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, it is mandatory that whenever any major penalty such as is mentioned in Rule imposed on a Government servant, a show cause notice must be issued to the accused Government servant, stating the action proposed to be taken against him, and asking him to show cause, within a specified time, why such action should not be taken. The official is also entitled to know the reasons of the disciplinary authority in coming to the conclusion that the charges against him have been proved. Therefore, while issuing a hx show cause notice, it is essential that a copy of the enquiry officer's report is also furnished. Where the disciplinary authority is not the inquiring authority, a statement of its findings to-gether with the reasons for disagreement, if any with the findings of the inquiring authority, should also be made available to the accused Government servant.
3. In this connection, It may be noted that reduction in pay or postponement of increment with retrospective effect except where the pay is held up at an efficiency bar is a major penalty which attracts the provisions of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution requiring the disciplinary authority to serve a show cause notice on the delinquent Government servant before imposing such a penalty.
4. It is impressed upon all officers that neglect in the due observance of the procedure prescribed in the Rules, is liable to vitiate the whole proceedings and the ultimate order passed therein. It may happen that though on merits the order of punishment may be fully justified, it may have to be set aside on account of some technical defect or irregularity committed in the conduct of the enquiry. This may often enable a guilty party to escape punishment, as also cause considerable financial loss to Government. It should be noted that glaring faults in procedure by officers conducting enquiries will be deemed a failure of duty and Government will be constrained to take suitable action against the defaulting officers.
O.M.No.GAD 6 OSR 59, Bangalore, dated the 25th April 1959
Procedural instructions regarding Departmental Enquiries under the C.C.A. Rules.
In para 4 of the Offical Memorandum issued with No.GAD 3 CAR 57, dated 14th December 1957, laying down the procedure for dealing with the request by a Government servant for an oral enquiry and/or to be heard in person it is stated that "an enquiry must be held where the Government servant asks for it" etc., The intention of the said rule is that an enquiry should be held only if the Government servant desires such enquiry and not otherwise. The word "WHERE" is used only in the above sense, and is not intended to
confer the right to choose venue of the enquiry on the Government servant. To place the matter beyond doubt, it is directed that the word "if" be substituted for the word "where" occurring in para 4 of the Official Memorandum referred to above line 10 of the printed copy.
O.M.No.GAD 8 OSR, 59 dated 18th May1959
Sub:- Supply of copies of Evidence, etc. to delinquent officers.
In para 5 of the procedural instruction in regard to holding departmental enquires under the Mysore Civil Services (C.C.A) Rules, 1957, issued with O.M.No.GAD (OM) 3 CAR 57, dated the 14th December 1957, it has been stated that copies of such evidence as are required by the accused Government servant may be permitted to taken by him or at the discretion of the enquiry officer supplied to him. The question has been arised whether the supply of copies is to be free or charged for. It is hereby directed that normally the procedure should be that the Government servant himself should be permitted to take copies if he so desires and in this case there can be no charges. If in any particular case for special reasons, the enquiry officer feels that he should arrange to supply copies himself he may furnish uncertified copies and, consiering the labour involved a charge of 14 N.P. per 100 words may be levied. The enquiry officer should as far as possible should avoid the regular system of supplying copies and arrange that the delinquent official himself takes copies, as otherwise it will mean the setting up of a copying organisation in offices which have to deal with a large number of enquiries.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD (S1) 23 SSR 59. Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated: 2nd July, 1959.
Ashada 11 S.E. 1881.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- "Warning" and "Censure" - Distinction between.
Enquiries are being received by Government as to the distinction between "Warning" and "Censure". The main distinction is that an order of "Censure" is a formal and public act intended to convey that the person concerned has been held guilty of some blame-worthy act or omission for which it has been found necessary to award him a formal punishment. And nothing can amount to a 'Censure' unless it is intended to be such a formal punishment and imposed for 'good and sufficient reasons' after following the procedure prescribed in the Mysore Civil Services (C.C.A) Rules 1957. A record of the punishment so imposedis kept on the Officer's confidential roll and the fact that he has been 'Censured' will have its bearing on the assessment of his merit or suitability for promotion to higher posts.
2. It is the duty of superior officer to see that he gives to his subordinates at all time advice, guidance and assistance to correct their faults and dificiencies. There may be occasions when a superior officer may find it necessary to criticise adversly the work of his subordinates (e.g. point out negligence, carelessness, lack of thoroughness, delays, etc)
or he may call for an explanation for some act or omission and taking all circumstances into consideration, it may be felt that, while the matter is not serious enough to justify the imposition of the formal punishment of 'Censure', it calls for some informal action, such as the communication of written warning, admonition or reprmand.
3. It is a matter of simple nature justice that written warnings, repremands etc., should not be administered or placed on a Government servant's confidential record unless the authority doing so is satisfied that there is good and sufficient reason to do so. Thus, if the circumstances, justify it, a mention may also be made of such a warning etc., in the officer's confidential roll; however, the mere fact that it is so mentioned in the character roll does not convert the warning etc., into a 'Censure', because it has not intended that a "Formal punishment" should be inflicted nor were any formal proceedings as required under the C.C.A. Rules held.
The Heads of Departments are required to bear in mind this distinction between 'Warning' and 'Censure'.
Sd/-
Under Secretary to Government,
G.A.D. (Services-I).
O.M.No.GAD (S-1) 44 SSR 59, Bangalore, dated 20th July 1959.
Imposition of Penalty of reduction-specifying the period
One of the penalties specified in Rule 8 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957 is reduction to a lower service, grade or post. According to Rule 7 of Mysore Govt. Servants (Seniority) Rules, 1957 when a Government servant is reduced to lower service, class or grade without specifying the rank to which he should be reduced in the lower service, class or grade or the period for which he should be reduced, he is normally placed at the top of the lower service, class or grade. In such cases he will be eligible for promotion when the next vacancy in the higher grade occurs. In case such a vacancy arises immediately after a Government servant is reduced to a lower grade or class and the delinquent Government servant is promoted to the higher grade the intention underlying his reduction to a lower service or grade would be defeated. In order to avoid such contingencies, the disciplinary authorities are requested to see that while issuing orders imposing the penalty of reduction to a lower service, class or grade(a) the rank to which the Government Servants concerned should be reduced in the lower grade or service is expressly specified and (b) the period for which the reduction order should be in effect, i.e., during which he shall not be considered for promotion, is specifically mentioned. The result of such an order will be that the Government servant cannot be promoted (i.e., restored) to the higher grade until the period expires. After the period expires, he is not automatically restored to the higher grade but will be eligible to be considered for promotion when the next vacancy occurs.
O.M.No.GAD (S-1)56 SSR 59, Bangalore, dated the 9th October 1959.
Promotion of Government Servants whose conduct is under enquiry.
Government has had under consideration the question whether a Government servant whose conduct is under enquiry should be considered for promotion if his seniority and previous record of service apart from the case under enquiry justify it. It is now directed
that a Government servant on whom charge sheet has been served after a prima facie case had been established against him should not be considered for promotion till the enquiry is completed. In case the Government servant is exonerated in the enquiry held against him and if his record of service is otherwise satisfactory as would entitle him for promotion, he should be promoted immediately after completion of the departmental enquiry, his seniority and rank remaining the same as would have been the case if there had been no departmental enquiry instituted against him. The Secretariat Department and Heads of Departments are requested to follow these instructions carefully in future.
O.M.No: 6400/58-15, dated 24th March 1960.
Sub:- States Reorganisation - Appeals against orders of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service passed by the pre-Reorganised Madras State prior to 1st November 1956 - Authority to dispose of - Decisions of the Government of India-Communicated.
Ref:- From the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, letter No.21/3/58-SR(S), dated 5th February 1960.
It has been brought to the notice of the Government that several officers in the service of the pre-Reorganised Madras State prior to 1st November 1956, who would in the normal course have been allotted to Kerala or Mysore State consequent on the Reorganisation of States, if they had been available for allotment just before the date of Reorganisation, but were dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired from service before that date, had before or after the date, preferred petitions or appeals against orders passed in their case by the pre-Reorganised Madras State. The question as to the State Government which should deal with such petitions or appeals, was examined by the Government in consultation with the Government of India.
2. The Government have decided to accept the decision of the Government of India in the matter and direct that the present Madras State which is the principal successor State in respect of the pre-Reorganised Madras State, should consider and decide on merits any appeal or petition preferred before or after the 1st November 1956 by an officer dismissed, removed, or compulsorily retired from service prior to 1st November 1956. If on a consideration of the merits of the case, it is decided by this Government to allow the appeal after undergoing all the procedures and formalities prescribed therefor and to reinstate the officer necessary orders should be passed by this Government and the officer should be reinstated in this State. Thereafter, the question of the allocation of the officer to the new Kerala or Mysore State, as the case may be, as if he was available for allotment on the 31st October 1956 should be taken up for consideration. If it is decided to allot the officer to any other State, the concurrence of the other State Government should be obtained. In cases of disagreement, the Government of India in the Ministry of Home Affairs, should be approached for passing necessary orders.
3. The Heads of Departments and the Departments of Secretariat are requested to take action as outlined in para 2 above and dispose of the appeals or petitions already pending with them and that may be received by them hereafter.
4. The receipt of this memorandum should be acknowledged.
O.M.No: GAD 49 DIF 59, dated 8th April 1960.
Sub:- Procedure in respect of Disciplinary matter.
Ref:- Circular letter No. GAD 36 DIF(Int) 58, dated 15th November 1958.
In paragraph 2 of Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, letter No. 21/3/58(S), dated 30th October 1958, a copy of which was forwarded to Heads of Department and Secretaries to Government for information with the Circular letter referred to above, it was suggested that appeals or petitions preferred before or after the 1st November 1956 by persons dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired from service prior to 1st November 1956 should be disposed of by the principal successor State and in case it was ultimately decided to reinstate the Government servant, the question of his allocation will be decided in consultation with the State Governments concerned. It was pointed out to the Government of India by certain State Governments that while following this procedure, difficulties were likely to arise in the cases of persons who were serving in an area which after reorganisation formed part of another State, as the conclusions arrived at by the Government of the principal successor State might not necessarily be acceptable to the Government of the other State and the latter might not agree to the reallocation of that person to that State.
The Government of India have re-examined the matter in the light of the views expressed by the State Governments and have decided as follows:-
(i) The principal successor State should consider and decide on merits any appeal or petition preferred before or after the 1st November 1956 by an officer dismissed, removed or compulsorily retired prior to 1st November 1956.
(ii) If on a consideration of the merits of the case, it is decided by the principal successor State to allow the appeal and to reinstate the officer, necessary orders may be passed by them and the officer should be reinstated in the principal successor State. Thereafter, they may take up the question of the allocation of the officer and deal with the matter as if the officer concerned was available for allocation on the 31st October 1956.
(iii) If it is decided to allot the officer to any other State, the other Government's concurrence should be obtained. In case of disagreement the Central Government may be approached for passing necessary orders.
The above decisions of the Government of India are communicated to the Secretaries to Government and Heads of Departments for information and future guidance in dealing with cases of disciplinary proceedings initiated before or after 1st November 1956.
No.GAD 21 OSR 60, dated, Bangalore, 28th July1960 (Sravana 6, Saka Era 1882)
According to Sub-Rule (5) of Rule 11 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, relating to the procedure for imposing major penalties, a Government servant against whom Departmental proceeding are being held, can take the assistance of another Government servant with the approval of the disciplinary authority, in presenting his defence before the Enquiry Officer. Government had under consideration in this behalf the question whether it is necessary to obtain in writing the consent of the latter and is now pleased to direct that the disciplinary authority should require the Government servant who desires another Government servant to assist him in presenting his defence, to produce the consent of that Government servant in writing and should also formally consult the Head of the Department concerned, before granting approval.
By Order and in the name of the
Governor of Mysore,
Sd/-
B.R.Verma,
Under Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department (O.M).
O.M.No: GAD 35 SSR 60, dated 15th October 1960.
Sub:- Dismissal of Government Servants in public services.
Ref:-1. Official Memorandum No. GAD 80 RSR 57, dated 9th May 1957.
2. Official Memorandum No. GAD 80 RSR 57, dated 4th January 1958.
3. Official Memorandum No. GAD 80 RSR 57, dated 4th February 1958.
In the Official Memoranda cited above instructions have been issued that all cases of dismissals of Government Servants should be reported to the Chief Secretary to Government in the General Administration Department (Services) every quarter for notification in the Mysore Gazette. According to these instructions, the return should be in the prescribed form and it should contain only the names of Government Servants (1) whose statutory appeals, if any, against their dismissal has been disposed of; and (2) those who have not preferred appeals against their dismissal within the time prescribed in the rules for preferring such appeals.
2. Experience has shown that the compilation of the return at the end of each quarter involves considerable labour and delay and that the purpose can equally be served by half-yearly returns instead of quarterly returns. It has therefore, been decided that beginning with the hlaf-year ending 31st December 1960, the return should be converted into a half yearly return.
3. It is therefore directed that all the cases of dismissals of Government Servants should be reported to Government every half year, in January and July. The return should invariably be in the prescribed from as in the Annexure and each column in the form should be correctly filled up without leaving any column blank. Nil returns should also be sent.
ANNEXURE
F O R M
1. Name of the Person dismissed :
2. Father's name :
3. Educational qualification :
4. Date and Place of birth :
5. Place of residence :
6. Marks of identification :
7. Post held :
8. Reasons for dismissal :
O.M.No.FD 92 SRS 60, dated: 1st December 1960.
Sub:- Clarification regarding Rule 59, Mysore Civil Services Rules.
Doubts have been expressed as to the exact interpretation of Rule 59 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules, and therefore the following clarifications are issued for the information and guidance of all concerned.
"Instruction" below Rule 59:-
"(a) Every order passed by a competent authority imposing on a Government servant the penalty of reduction to a lower stage in a time-scale should indicate.
(i) the date from which it will take effect and the period (in terms of years and months) for which the penalty shall be operative;
(ii) the stage in the time-scale (in terms of rupees to which the Government servant is reduced; and
(iii) the extent (in term of years and months) if any, to which the period referred to at (i) above should operate to postpone future increments.
It should be noted that reduction to a lower stage in a time-scale is not permissible under the rules either for an unspecified period or as a permanent measure. * Deleted by on No. FD 17 SRS 76 Dated 28th September 1978 [Also when a Government servant is reduced to a particular stage, his pay will remain constant at that stage for the entire period of reduction.] The period to be specified under (iii) should in no case exceed the period specified under the period specified under (i);
(b) The question as to what should be the pay of a Government servant on the expiry of the period of reduction should be decided as follows:-
(i) If the order of reduction lays down that the period of reduction shall not operate to post-pone future increments, the Government servant should be allowed the pay which he would have drawn in the normal course but for the reduction. If however, the pay drawn by him immediately before reduction was below the efficiency bar he should not be allowed to cross the bar except in accordance with the he provision of rule 52;
(ii) If the order specifies that the period of reduction was to operate to postpone future increments for any specified period the pay of the Government servant shall be fixed in accordance with (i) above but after treating the period for which the increment were to be postponed as not counting for increments.
CIRCULAR NO: GAD 59 OAC 61, dated 30th September 1961.
Sub:- Criminal misconduct-Government Servants- Procedure to be followed.
Several doubts have been expressed regarding the exact procedure to be followed in cases of criminal misconduct, committed by Government Servants. The following clarifications are issued in partial modification of instruction 20 of Procedural Instructions
issued in Official Memorandum No.GAD (OM) 3 CAR 57, dated 14th December 1957 and Circular No.GAD (S-1) 38 SSR 58, dated 30th October 1958, namely:-
1. Where officers are trapped or caught red-handed while accepting illegal gratification, the investigation should be continued and completed and regular charge-sheet in the Court of the concerned Special Judge should be filed.
2. Where cases are initiated by the police either suo motu or at the instance of the Head of a Department, If on completion of the investigation it is found that the evidence collected is not sufficient so as to warrant a conviction in a Court of law, the Anti-Corruption Department or the Police Department, as the case may be, should consider and move the concerned Court for obtaining the relevant summary for dropping the proceedings. After obtaining such a summary the records of investigation should be forwarded to the Head of the Department who should decide about the sufficiency of the material for initiating a departmental enquiry under the M.C.S. (CCA) Rules, 1957 and take action accordingly.
3. Where departmental enquiries have been started without reference to the Police, such enquiries should be continued and completed according to the rules. If at any stage of the enquiry the Disciplinary Authority considers that the offences disclosed are so grave that a prosecution in a Court of law is essential in the interest of administration, then steps should be taken to lunch regular prosecution and the Departmental enquiry should be kept in abeyance.
4. It is impressed on all concerned that delay in the institution of criminal prosecution not only frustrates the object of the prosecution but may possibly affect the credit to be attached to the evidence that will be adduced in support of the prosecution. Delayed prosecutions are looked upon with suspicion by Courts. It is essential therefore that prosecution should normally be conceived at the earliest stage as soon as the offence is committed and detected. If in any case there is delay in launching a prosecution, then such cases should be continued only departmentally.
5. Where a prosecution ends in an order of acquittal, then the question of Departmental enquiry does not arise if the accused has been acquitted on merits. If the order of acquittal is on some technical ground, then the propriety of starting a Departmental enquiry should be considered on the merits of each case after a careful scrutiny of the judgement.
O.M.No: GAD 12 OSR 61, dated 25th October 1961.
Sub:- Procedure to be followed in forwarding investigation papers to the Anti-Corruption Department.
The Department of Anti-Corruption and Technical Audit (P.W.D) as at present constituted is responsible for investigations into-
(a) the allegations of inefficiency and corruption against Gazetted Officers;
(b) to conduct Departmental Enquiries in cases where the Director, Anti-Corruption, is appointed as an Enquiry Officer under Rule 14(A) of Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957;
2. The above character of duties should not be construed to exclude the responsibility of the heads of departments and the Secretaries to Government to look after the 'moral health' of Government Servants working under their control.
3. With this object in view, it is necessary that whenever representations containing allegations against Government Servants working in any department are received, the supervisory officers should in the first instance carefully scrutinise the allegations to see if 'prima facie' the allegations are serious or frivolous. In the latter event, it will be for the head of the department to give a summary disposal to the communication in question and file the papers. Where, however, preliminary study discloses the desirability or necessity of further probe, it will be the duty of the department to check on the allegations with reference to the available records or other relevant material held in the Office. If after this check more detailed and systematic investigation is considered desirable, a reference should be made to the Director of Anti-Corruption. It will be necessary to send all records connected with the allegations under references as well as the preliminary observations of the Department to the Director of Anti-Corruption.
4. In no case the communication containing allegations against Gazetted or non-Gazetted Officers should be sent "mechanically" to the Director, Anti-Corruption without the considered views or observations of the department.
5. The Director of Anti-Corruption after conducting detailed investigations into the cases remitted to him by concerned, departments, will formulate his view precisely regarding the nature of allegations, the extent to which they have been substantiated by facts and the Officers who are to be held answerable. He will also propose appropriate action against the concerned officials, e.g., Departmental proceedings, Enquiry or Summary, departmental proceedings under Rule 12 or Criminal proceedings in a Court of Law.
6. The recommendation of the Director of Anti-Corruption on the above points together with the records of preliminary investigation will be sent to the Secretary of the Department concerned.
7. It will be the duty of the Secretary of the Department to examine the report of the Director of Anti-Corruption and record of investigation and after careful examination, obtain orders of Government on the following points:-
(a) Whether on the basis of the report of preliminary enquiry conducted by the Director, Anti-Corruption, prima facie case for holding a Departmental Enquiry has been made out or whether the case warrants criminal prosecution in the Court of Law.
(b) If Departmental Enquiry is called for the Officer who should be appointed to conduct the departmental enquiry (it need not in all cases be conducted by the Director, Anti-Corruption. In fact, in large number of cases it will be desirable to appoint Departmental Officers as Enquiry Officers.
(c) The officers against whom the enquiry is to be held and the charges on which the enquiry should be held. For this purpose, it will be necessary for the department to specify the proposed charges in the form of a draft.
(d) The nature of proceedings, namely, whether Rule 11 or Rule 12 of the C.C.A. Rules should be applied. In the latter case it will not be necessary to appoint an Officer as an Enquiry Officer. The required notices under Rule 12 would have to be issued by the Secretariat Departmental concerned.
(e) If enquiry under Rule 11 is decided upon, the time within which the enquiry should be completed, and
(f) any other relevant instructions that Government may like to issue, e.g., in cases where common proceedings are necessary against more than one Officer, specific direction of the Government to this Department under the relevant Rules would have to be issued.
O.M.No: GAD 14 OSR 61, dated 13th November 1961.
Sub:- Supply of copies of documents to the delinquent official.
Doubts often arise whether a particular document or set of documents asked for by a Government servant in a Departmental enquiry may be made available to him or not. The question of the extent of access to official records to which a Government servant is entitled under sub-rule (3) of Rule 11 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 has been examined in the light of the Official Memorandum issued by the Government of India (Ministry of Home Affairs No.F-30-5-61-AVD dated 25th August 1961) and the following clarifications are issued regarding the access to and/or supply of copies of the following documents to a Government servant:-
(1) Documents to which reference has been made in the statement of allegations;
A list of documents which are proposed to be relied upon to prove the charge and the facts stated in the statement of allegations should be drawn up and supplied to the officer along with the charge sheet or as soon thereafter as possible, and the officer be permitted to inspect the documents mentioned in the list, if he so desires.
(2) Documents and records not so referred to in the statement of allegations but which the Government servant concerned considers are relevant for the purpose of his defence;
Such a request should ordinarily be acceded to. But it is open to the Government to deny inspection of these documents if in its opinion such records are not relevant to the defence of the case or it is not desirable in public interest to permit inspections. Where inspections or supply of copies of documents is denied, an order should be recorded in that behalf assigning reasons for the denial.
(3) Statements of witnesses recorded in the course of (a) preliminary enquiry conducted by the Department or (b) investigation made by the Police;
These statements can be used only for purposes of cross examination and the Government servant is called upon to discredit only those witnesses relied upon by the prosecution and as such the Government servant may be allowed access to the statements only of those witnesses who are proposed to be examined in proof of the charges or the facts stated in the statement of allegations, the demand for copies however being made when the witnesses are called for examination at the time of oral enquiry. However if the Government servant applies for copies of these statements the same may be furnished sometime prior to the cross-examination of the witnesses.
(4) Reports submitted to Government or other competent authority including the disciplinary authority by (a) an officer appointed to hold a preliminary inquiry to ascertain facts, (b) by the Police after investigation;
Such reports other than those referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (1) of Section 173 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 are usually confidential and intended only to satisfy the competent authority whether further action is called for, and as such it is not necessary to permit the Government servant to inspect these reports. Any reference to
such reports in the statement of allegations should be avoided as otherwise it would not be possible to deny access to these reports if required.
The procedure with regard to supply of copies and documents has been indicated in O.M.No.GAD 8 OSR 59, dated 18th May 1959. It is not ordinarily necessary to supply copies of the various documents and it is sufficient if the Government servant is given such access as is permitted under the rules. A Government servant should not however be permitted to take photostat copies of the documents.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD (S-1) 43 SRR 62 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated 1st June, 1962.
Jyeshta 11, S.E. 1884.
CIRCULAR
According to Rule 11 (5) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957, Government servant against whom departmental proceedings are taken can take the assistance of another Government servant with the approval of the disciplinary authority in presenting his defence before the Enquiry Officer; but may not engage a Legal Practitioner for the purpose, unless the person nominated by the Disciplinary Authority or a specially empowered authority, as the case may be is a Legal Practitioner. This is in lieu of the assistance of the Legal Practitioner. It implies that the assisting Government Servant may do whatever a Legal Practitioner would do for his Client i.e., to cross-examine witnesses examined in support of the charges, examine defence witnesses and even argue.
It has been brought to the notice of Government that a Government servant nominated under Rule 11 (5) of the said rules by an accused Government servant was not permitted by an Enquiry Officer to cross-examine witnesses in support of the charges and to argue the case for the defence, the contention being that Rule 11 (5) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, permits an accused Government servant to take only the services of another Government servant and that such assistance cannot include the right to cross-examine the witnesses and to argue the case. The procedure adopted by the Enquiry Officer if this case is not correct. Government Servants are denied the benefit or expert legal practitioner in defending themselves and whatever little assistance they expect from their colleagues who are Government Servants, will be thwarted, if the enquiry officer does not permit a Government servant whose assistance, another Government servant takes under Rule 11(5) to cross-examine the witness. Government servant assisting another Government servant under Rule 11(5) of the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules should be permitted to do whatever a Lawyer would do for his Client viz. to cross-examine witnesses examined in support of the charges, examine defence witnesses and even argue the case.
Sd/-
B.Purushotham,
Uneder Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Services-1)
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
NO.GAD (S.1) 33 SSR 61, BANGALORE, DATED: 27-6-62. (ASHADHA 6, SAKA ERA 1884)
Sub:Failure to follow the prescribed procedure laid down for departmental proceedings against Government Servants for misconduct. Issue Instructions - reg.
The following questions in connection with the reinstatement of dismissed/removed/ discharged Government Servants whose services have been terminated, have been considered.
1. Whether before the Government decide to reinstate an individual on grounds of equity, the concurrence of the Finance Department should be obtained for payment of pay and allowances for the intervening period, or whether the administrative authorities could themselves, after following the prescribed procedure reinstate the person and sanction payment of pay and allowances under Rule 99 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules.
2. Whether in cases of reinstatement on the grounds of dismissal/removal/discharge from or termination of service being held by a Court of Law or by an Appellate/reviewing authority to have been made without following the procedure required under Article 311 of the Constitution, payment of full pay and allowances for the intervening period is automatic and compulsory.
3. As regards Question No.1, it has been decided that the concurrence of the Finance Department will not be necessary for reinstating a Government servant if the authority which reinstates the Government servant is competent to appoint him. The question as to what pay and allowances should be allowed for the intervening period and whether or not the period should be treated as duty will be dealt with under Rule 99 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules.
4. Regarding Question No.2 stated in para 1 above, it has been decided that Rule 99 of the Mysore Civil Service Rules is inapplicable in cases where dismissal/removal/discharge from or termination of service is held by a Court of Law or by an Appellate/reviewing authority to have been made without following the procedure required under Art. 311 of the Constitution.
In Such cases:
(i) if it is decided to hold a further enquiry and the Government servant is deemed to have been placed under suspension from the date of dismissal/removal/ discharge/termination under Rule 10 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, the Government servant will be paid a subsistence allowance from the date he is deemed to have been placed under suspension, under Rule 98 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules, 1958.
(ii) If the Government servant is not deemed to have been placed under suspension as envisaged under (i) above, the payment of full pay and allowances for the intervening period and treatment of that period as duty for all purposes will be automatic and compulsory, provided that:-
(a) the arrears should be paid subject to the law of limitation -
(b) where the reinstated Government servant has secured employment during any period between the dismissal/removal/discharge/termination and reinstatement, the pay and allowances admissible to him after reinstatement for the intervening period shall be reduced by the emoluments earned by him during such employment unless the
emoluments earned by him exceeds the pay and allowances admissible to him provided that the amount to be paid under (i) and (ii) above will be determined subject to the directions, if any, in the decree of the Court regarding arrears of salary.
5. As the dismissal/removal/discharge/termination of service of a Government servant without following the procedure laid down in the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, results in the payment of arrears by way of pay and allowances, the need for meticulously observing the proper procedure in such cases is once again impressed on all concerned. In all cases where the circumstances leading to a Government servant's reinstatement reveal that the authority which terminated his services, either wilfully did not observe, or through gross negligence failed to observe, the proper procedure before terminating the services of any Government servant, proceedings should be reinstituted against such authority under the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957 and the question of recovering from such authority the whole or part of the pecuniary loss arising from the reinstatement of the Government should be considered.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 6 SIN 62 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
General Administration Department (Services -2),
Bangalore, dated 2nd April 1963.
Chaitra 12 Saka Era 1885.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub: Orders of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement of Government Servants from service set aside by Courts - Issue instructions for guidance of competent authorities.
It has been brought to the notice of Government that in many cases there has been undue delay on the part of competent authorities in taking appropriate action whenever an order dismissing, removing or compulsorily retiring a Government servant from service has been set aside by the Courts. Delays in such cases are not excusable. In order to ensure that delays in such matters do not occur, Government are pleased to issue the following instructions for the guidance of competent authorities.
2. According to sub-rule (4) of rule 10 of the Mysore Civil Service (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957, when a penalty of dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service imposed on a Government servant is set aside or declared to render void in a consequence of a decision of a court of law, if the Disciplinary Authority, on a consideration of the circumstances of the case, decides to hold a further enquiry, the Government servant shall be deemed to have been placed under suspension by the Appointing Authority from the date of the original order of dismissal, removal or retirement and shall continue to remain under suspension until further orders. Consequently, the question of reinstatement of the concerned Government Servant should be decided after considering the feasibility of holding a fresh or a further enquiry into the matter. There may be cases where the competent authority finds that it is not expedient to hold a fresh or further enquiry because by lapse of time, evidence which was originally
available is not longer available. In such cases, a decision should be taken, and where the original order had been the subject matter of an appeal to a higher authority with the approval of that authority, and the Government servant should be reinstated as soon as possible after the orders of the Court.
3. In cases where it is decided to hold a fresh or a further enquiry, it is open to the competent authority to reinstate the Government servant concerned if his continuance on duty would not prejudice the fresh or further enquiry so instituted or the gravity of the misconduct is not such as to be in-expedient in public interests to allow him to hold office. The important question will be whether in the light of the charges, the Govt. servant may be allowed to function in office or should be continued under suspension. Any decision for reinstatement depends on the decision of the competent authority on this question.
4. Where an appeal is preferred against the decision of the Court no action should be taken under these instructions except with the approval of the Government.
5. The above instructions should be followed scrupulously and no delay should be allowed to occur between the date of the direction of a Court and action by the competent authority consequent upon the decision.
Sd/-
K.Narayanaswamy,
Chief Secretary to Government.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 46 OAC 64 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,Bangalore,
dated the 16th June 1964.
Jyeishta 26, SE. 1886.
C I R C U L A R
Sub:- Requisitions for Records required for purposes of investigations and inquiries by officers of the Anti-corruption Department -
In Circular No.GAD 18 EAD 57 dated the 26th March 1957, all Heads of Departments, Divisional Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners were instructed to comply promptly and without under delay, all requisitions from the Special Officer (now Director Anti-Corruption) for any record, report or information required for purposes of investigation. The Director, Anti-Corruption and Inspection has brought to notice of Government that some offices are not complying with the requisition of the Investigating Officers of his Department on a literal interpretation of the Circular mentioned above and that in order to avoid delay in sending every requisition for record under his signature, he has suggested that requisition signed by him or by any officer authorised by him may be accepted and acted upon by all officers.
2. On a consideration of all aspects of the matter it is hereby clarified that all requisitions for records, reports etc., received from the Director, Anti-Corruption and Inspection or any Gazetted Officer under him may be accepted and honored by all Presiding Officers incharge of Government Offices and institutions. If in any case the head of the Office feels that any particular document or record should not be made available to the Officer of the Anti-Corruption Department, he has to report the facts of the
case and the reasons for withholding the document and seek orders of his immediate superior gazetted officer and intimate the anti corruption department of the action taken. Such authority has to consider the matter in all aspects without delay and explain the reasons why any document is withheld.
3. These instructions may be communicated to all concerned for guidance.
P. Venkatraman,
Deputy Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department
(Political & O & M)
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 31 SRR 64 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated: 24-11-1964
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub: Instructions regarding preparation and submission of half yearly returns of dismissed Government Servants.
Ref:1. O.M.No.GAD 80 RSR 57, dt: 9-5-1957.
2. O.M.No.GAD 80 RSR 57, dt: 4-1-1958.
3. O.M.No.GAD 80 RSR 57, dt: 4-2-1958.
4. O.M.No.GAD 35 SSR 60, dt: 15-10-1960.
Instructions have been issued in the Official Memorandum cited above that all cases of dismissal of Government Servants should be reported to the Chief Secretary to Government in General Administration Department every half year in the prescribed proforma for notifying in the Mysore Government Gazette.
To avoid the present cumbrors procedure of reporting cases of dismissal of Government Servants to Government in General Administration Department for consolidation and then forwarding the copies of such notifications to all the Appointing Authorities under the State Government and other State Government for information and guidance, Government consider that it would be appropriate if all such information is sent to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) of the State as this will facilitate the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) to have a proper check of all cases referred to him for verification of the character and antecedents of candidates selected for appointment to public services. Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) will have to maintain a record of such names for giving the required certificate whenever asked for by any appointing authority. Generally, persons convicted of offences involving moral turpitude or who have been dismissed from service or debarred for future employment by the Government of India or any State Government or any Local Body should be deemed ineligible for appointments under the Mysore Government.
It is therefore directed that particulars of all cases of Government servants dismissed from service or debarred from future employment under the Government should in future be forwarded by the Heads of Department/Appointing Authority to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) Bangalore of the State and to the Superintendent of Police of the District where the Government servant concerned is a permanent resident in the form enclosed instead of sending them to Government in the General Administration Department. These lists should be sent before the 5th of every month and if there are no instances of dismissals etc., a 'nil' reports should be sent, the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) will compile the information so received from all Heads of Department/appointing authorities and publish a consolidated list received, by the 5th June and 5th December in the Mysore Government Gazette once in six months. The Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) will circulate a copy of this list to the Director, Central Intelligence Bureau, New Delhi and Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) of other State Governments. There is no need to circulate a copy of this list to the Heads of departments or to the Recruiting Authorities in Mysore State. They will however check-up from the Mysore Gazette whether any of the candidates selected for appointment have either been dismissed or debarred from services. The Inspector General of Police (CID) will also similarly collect names of such dismissed / debarred, persons from the Director of Central Intelligence Bureau, New Delhi and Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) of other State Governments. Whenever Heads of Departments and Appointing Authorities have to make appointments of persons from other states they should make a reference to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID), as to the character and antecedents of such persons.
In the case of dismissed/debarred State Government Servants who are permanent residents of Calcutta, Bombay, Madras, such particulars should be sent by the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) Bangalore to the Commissioner or the Deputy Commissioner of Police who is incharge of Special Branch in those State Governments. The Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID), Bangalore is also requested to collect similar particulars of persons who are permanent residence in the cities of Calcutta, Bombay and Madras and who have been dismissed or debarred from State Government service.
The above procedure is also applicable to all Panchayat Municipalities, District and Taluk Boards and other Local Bodies and State Government Undertakings. The Administrative Departments of the Secretariat are therefore requested to issue suitable instructions to the Local Bodies and Public Undertakings under them to send particulars of dismissed/debarredofficials employed under them to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (CID) of the State through their Heads of Department.
sd/-
C.K.Seshadri,
Deputy Secretary to Government GAD (Pol. and O.M.)
Annexure to Official Memorandum No.GAD 31 SRR 64, dt: 24-11-1964.
F O R M
Name of the Person dismissed :
Father's name :
Educational qualification :
Date and Place of birth :
Place of residence :
Marks of identification :
Post held :
Reasons for dismissal :
CONFIDENTIAL
Sub:- Public Service-circumstances under which a Government servant may be placed under suspension-instructions regarding.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 21 SSR 65 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated 26th Feb. 1965.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
On the recommendation of the Committee on Prevention of Corruption, the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs have issued certain instructions, in their Confidential Official Memorandum No.43/56/64-AVD dated 22-10-1964, for consideration of the disciplinary authority as a guiding factor when Central Government Servants may be placed under suspension. Based on these instructions, the State Government have decided that while public interest should be the guiding factor in deciding to place a Government servant under suspension, and the disciplinary authority should have the discretion to decide this taking all factors into account the following circumstances are indicated in which a disciplinary authority may consider it appropriate to place Government servant under suspension. These are only intended for guidance and should not be taken as mandatory.
(i) Cases where continuance in office of the Government servant will prejudice the investigation, trial or any enquiry (e.g.apprehended tampering with witnesses or documents);
(ii) Where the continuance in office of the Government Servant is likely to seriously subvert discipline in the office in which the public servant is working;
(iii) Where the continuance in office of the Government servant will be against the wider public interest (other than those covered by (i) and (ii) such as there is a public scandal and it is necessary to place the Government servant under suspension to demonstrate the policy of the Government to deal strictly with officers involved in such scandals particularly corruption,
(iv) Where allegations have been made against the Government servant and the preliminary inquiry has revealed that a prima facie case is made out which would justify his prosecution or his being proceeded against in departmental
proceedings, and whether the proceedings are likely to end in his conviction and/or dismissal, removal or compulsory retirement from service.
NOTE:
(a) In the first three circumstances, the disciplinary authority may exercise his discretion to place a Government servant under suspension even then the case is under investigation and before a primafacie case has been established.
(b) Certain types of misdemeanor where suspension may be desirable in the four circumstances mentioned are indicated below:-
(i) any offence or conduct involving moral turpitude.
(ii) corruption, embezzlement or misappropriation of Government money, possession of disproportionate assets, misuse of official powers for personal gain.
(iii) serious negligence and dereliction of duty resulting in considerable loss to Government.
(iv) desertion of duty;
(v) refusal or deliberate failure to carry out written orders of superior officers.
In respect of the type of misdemeanour specified in sub-clauses (iii), (iv) and (v) discretion has to be exercised with care.
The Secretaries to Government and Heads of Department are requested to being the above instruction to the notice of all concerned confidentially for guidance.
sd/-
C.R.Sheshadri,
Deputy Secretary to Government
GAD., (POL., & O & M)
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 105 SRR 64 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated the 23rd March 65.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Public Services - Departmental Proceedings against Government Servants involved in cases of fraud, embezzlement, loss of Government money etc. instructions-
Ref: Circular No.GAD (S-1) 38 SSR dated, 30th October 1958.
Instances have come to the notice of Government where prompt action has not been taken against Government Servants involved in loss of Government money due to fraud, embezzlement, etc., It is very important to avoid delay in such cases in investigation since any delay in taking action either departmentally or by recourse to original proceedings results in loss to Government in as much as the amounts misappropriated
become irrecoverable due to the fact the Government Servants concerned either retire or are dead.
2) It has also been noticed that in cases of fraud or embezzlement by Government Servants, there is a tendency on the part of the Head of the Office or a Department to consider that lodging a criminal complaint saves the trouble of initiating departmental proceedings and is therefore easier to have recourse to it. As soon as cases of loss of Government money come to notice, prompt action should be taken to investigate the same and fix the responsibility, both directed and indirect for the loss on the persons involved and to decide as to who among them should be prosecuted or in whose cases departmental proceedings would suffice or are possible irrespective of the decisions to prosecute all or some of the delinquents in a Court of Law, departmental proceedings may be commenced against all of them without undue delay and such proceedings should be carried as far as possible, short of the stage of recording of a finding and imposing a penalty, before the case against those whom it is decided to prosecute is put in Court. When a charge sheet is filed against any one of the delinquents in a Court of Law, the departmental proceedings against him should be stayed. It should be formally resumed or concluded or dropped according to the merits of the case after the decision of the court is available. If the subject matter of the charge-sheet in a criminal court is also a point of issue or relevant fact with respect to disciplinary proceedings against other delinquents, then the entire proceedings shall have to be stayed, and if the subject matter of the charge-sheet in a Court of Law and the charge framed in the disciplinary proceedings against the other delinquents are not the same but distinct, then the departmental proceedings should be continued. The stage upto which departmental proceedings prior to prosecution, should be taken must however depend on the circumstances of each case and cannot be precisely defined. Where it appears that recourse to judicial proceedings is likely to be involved, competent legal advice should be taken by the departments concerned and where there is a reasonable suspicion of fraud or other criminal offence, a prosecution should be the rule unless the legal advisers consider that evidence available is not such as will secure a conviction. If the accused government servant is convicted by the court and awarded an adequate sentence the departmental proceedings against him should be formally completed and proceedings against other delinquents continued. If the accused is not convicted, or the accused is inadequately punished, the departmental proceedings against him will be resumed as also against the remaining delinquent government Servants.
3. As regards the question of taking action against government Servants who by their failure to prevent fraud or embezzlement have also become responsible for the loss of government money, in the case of such government Servants also departmental proceedings should be commenced along with the actual miscreants without any delay irrespective of the question of prosecuting them in a court of law. However, it may not be possible to take a final position on the charges against such government Servants until the Court's findings against such principle offenders are available. The administrative authority concerned should decide on the basis of the facts and records of each case how far and in what cases he can proceed departmentally at once against such government Servants. It is difficult to lay down any hard and fast rule when the departmenta proceedings against such a Government Servants. It is difficult to lay down any hard and fast rule when the departmental proceedings against such a government Servants without assuming or even referring to the guilt of the principle offenders and without pre-judging the issue before the court and thus avoid committing contempt of court. The authorities concerned will have to find out that the evidence already avoidable would be sufficient and in any case they may get written copies of such documents as may have to be put in a Court.
4. All Heads of Departments are requested to go through these instructions carefully and bring them to the notice of all concerned. The departmental proceedings of loss of government money should be dealt with as expeditiously as possible and where the loss of government money is due to failure on the part of the officers concerned for proper supervision of accounts, the matter will have to be viewed seriously in accordance with these instructions.
Sd/-
K.Balachandran,
Chief Secretary to Government.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 129 SRR 65 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated 29th Dec. 1965.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Preparation and submission of half-yearly returns of dismissed/debarred Government Servants - Further instructions regard -
Ref:- O.M.NO.GAD 31 SRR 64 dated 24th November 1964.
Instructions have been issued in the Official Memorandum cited above, that all cases of dismissal of Government Servants should be reported to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (C.I.D.) Bangalore for compilation and publication in the Mysore Government Gazette. Generally persons convicted of offences involving moral turpitude or who have been dismissed from service/debarred from future employment by the Government of India or any State Government or any Local Body are deemed ineligible for appointments under the Government of Mysore.
It has come to the notice of Government that a certain Heads of a department included in the list of dismissed Government Servants, the name of a local candidate whose services were terminated on the expiry of the leave vacancy and also due to his misconduct. It was also stated that his services would, in the normal course, have been terminated with the reporting to duty of the regularly recruited candidate as he was only a local candidate.
It is hereby clarified that the returns of dismissed/debarred Government Servants should include only the names of Government Servants on whom the penalty of dismissal from service has been imposed as a result of disciplinary action taken against them under the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules. It should also include the names of Government Servants who have been dismissed from service as a result of conviction for criminal offices. Termination of services of a local candidate as a result of any other cause viz., ceasing of that vacancy, termination of leave vacancy, otherwise than as a penalty cannot be creation for inclusion of names in the list of dismissed/debarred Government Servants. Every Government servant has a right to appeal to the extent and to the authorities as provided for under the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules against the orders imposing any of the penalties specified in the said rules. It is not therefore appropriate to include the names of any dismissed Government Servants in the list of dismissed Government Servants until after the expiry of the period
allowed for such appeal or if an appeal is made within the period, till the disposal of the appeal.
The Secretaries to Government and Heads of Departments are requested to observe these instructions while sending the returns to the Deputy Inspector General of Police (C.I.D.) Bangalore.
K.S.N.Murthy,
Dy. Secy. to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Services)
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
Chief Secretariat
(GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT)
No.GAD 171 SSR 63, dated 2nd Feb. 1966
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub :- Departmental enquiries under Rule 14 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957. Issues Clarifications re.-
Rule 14 of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules, 1957, (as amended by Notification No.GAD 62 SSR 65, dated 21st August 1965), provided that, where an officer against whom a departmental enquiry is initiated has absconded, or where such officer does not take part in the inquiry or where for any reasons to be recorded in writing, it is impracticable to communicate with him, or where the Disciplinary Authority, for reasons to be recorded in writing, is satisfied that it is not reasonably practicable to follow the procedure prescribed in the said rules, the Disciplinary Authority may consider the circumstances of the case and pass such orders thereon as it deems fit.
2. The circumstances in which an inquiry can be proceeded within the absence of an accused person are clearly laid down in the rule itself. However, as it is necessary in all such cases to ensure that no irregularity in the procedure occurs which may vitiate the orders passed, the following clarifications are hereby issued for the information of all the Disciplinary and Inquiring Authorities:-
(a) The Disciplinary Authority should satisfy himself that there are circumstances warranting an ex-parte inquiry and pass an order in that behalf:
(b) Thereafter the Inquiring Authority should bring on record the evidence in support of the charge or charges and record his findings and submit his report to the Disciplinary Authority;
(c) The Disciplinary Authority shall consider the record of such enquiry and after satisfying himself that the charge or charges are proved, pass further orders.
sd/-
K.Balachandran,
Chief Secretary to Government.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
Chief Secretariat
(GENERAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT)
Circular No.GAD 18 SSR 66 dated 2nd March 1966
CIRCULAR
Instructions to officers to offer co-operation in giving evidence, etc., in any Enquiry by Enquiry Officers during enquiry proceedings under C.C.A. Rules and Vigilance Commission Rules.
Issues-
It has been reported by the Director of Vigilance that a Senior Officer of Government was reluctant to come before the Enquiry Officer and give evidence in a disciplinary proceedings. Even when he came, he raised all sorts of objections to answer the questions during the time of cross-examination.
A witness has no right to content that the question put to him is irrelevant. It is entirely left to the discretion of the enquiry officer to decide as to the nature of the questions that may be put to witnesses. Since Government's intention in framing the C.C.A. Rules and also in conducting enquiries is to find out the truth as to whether any allegation made against an officer is proved or not, it is the duty of every Government servant to come and give evidence before an Enquiry Officer irrespective of the fact whether the accused officer is a subordinate or not.
Therefore, it is hereby impressed that all officers/Government Servants should offer their fullest co-operation to the Vigilance Commission in any enquiry without any mental reservation, either during the examination-in-chief or during cross-examinations.
sd/-
K.S.N.Murthy,
Deputy Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Services).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 80 SSR 65. Mysore Government Secretariat, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore, dated 11th April, 1966.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Promotion of Government Servants involved in Departmental Enquiries.
Instructions have been issued in Official Memorandum No.GAD (S.1) 56 SSR 59, dated 9th October 1959 in the matter of promotion of Officers whose conduct comes under Departmental enquiry and who are subsequently exhonerated.
2. Government have considered the question further and in modification of the instructions contained in the Official Memorandum cited in para 2 above, hereby issue the following instructions for the guidance of the appointing and disciplinary authorities.
(a) While considering the question of promotion of a Government Servant from one grade to another, the fact that a departmental enquiry is pending against him whatever may be the stage of the enquiry, should not be taken into consideration except in those cases where the Government Servant is under suspension. In determining the quantum of punishment at the culmination of the enquiry, the fact that the Officer has in the meantime been promoted may of course be taken into account.
(b) If the offence for which a departmental enquiry is started against a Government Servant is so serious that his further promotion would not be in public interest, the Government Servant concerned should be placed under suspension forthwith and the question of his promotion, if any, should be decided after completion of the enquiry in accordance with instructions issued in O.M. dated 9-10-1959.
3. All Departmental enquiries should be completed within a period of six months in order to avoid hardships to the accused Government Servants. Officers and Officials responsible for delay in holding and finalising departmental enquiries will be held personally responsible, if inordiante delays come to Government's notice.
sd/-
K.Balachandran,
Chief Secretary to Government.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.ED 34 RPS 67. Mysore Government Secretariat, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore, dated 27th April 67, Vysk.7 Saka Era 1889.
CIRCULAR
Ref:- Letter No.G.6598, dated 15-12-1966 from the Compiler, Mysore Gazette.
A number of Notifications or notices regarding unauthorised absence of Government Servants of Class-III and Class-IV are being received in the office of the Compiler, Mysore Gazette, for publication in the Mysore Gazette. In some cases, the Government Servants who have been repatriated or reverted back to the parent Department do not immediately report to duty inspite of instructions or do not resume duty inspite of recall notice when they are on leave, or do not obey the transfer orders and remain absent unauthorisedly. The question whether publication of such notifications or notices in the Mysore Gazette is necessary, particularly in view of the need for economy in Government
expenditure, has been examined and the following instructions are issued for the guidance of all the concerned:-
In view of the provisions contained in Rules 106-A to 108 of the M.C.S. Rs, it is not necessary to publish in the Government gazette all the notices, Memos etc., served on the Government Servants who are absent anauthorisedly. Only the final notice in cases where the Government Servants have not replied to the usual notice or in cases when the whereabouts of the Government Servants are not known for a considerable time and when disciplinary action is proposed to be taken need be published in the Mysore Gazette for information as it is a statutory requirement. Unless such a notice is published in the Mysore Gazette, no action can be taken to terminate the services of any Government Servant who is absconding or has remained absent unauthorisedly for a long time.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 42 PVC 66. Mysore Government Secretariat, Vidhana Soudha, Bangalore, dated 5th August, 1967.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Stipulation of time limit for completing the Departmental Enquiry entrusted by government to the State Vigilance Commission.
It has been brought to the notice of Government by the State Vigilance Commission, that the disciplinary authority while entrusting the enquiry to the District Officers are stipulating time limit when enquiry officers are appointed under Rule 11 (2) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957.
Disciplinary authorities need not stipulate any time limit when enquiry officers are appointed under Rule 11 (2) of the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal) Rules 1957, and Enquiries entrusted to them.
If the disciplinary authority so desire it may separately cause a letter to be issued to the Enquiry Officer impressing on him the need for completion of the Enquiry as early as possible for reasons to be stated in writing such as, the accused Officer being kept under suspension, or his reaching the age of superannuation within a short period time, or such other reasons as may be warranted in the case.
sd/-
B.R.Deenadayal,
Deputy Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(General)
Copy of letter No.GAD 54 SRR 67, dated 14/16th September 1967 from the Chief Secretary to the Government of Mysore, Bangalore, addressed to the State Vigilance Commissioner, Bangalore.
Sub:- Continuance of Departmental Proceedings after retirement - Application of new Rule 214 of M.C.S. Rs.
With reference to your note bearing No.ADM.1996-120/ 66-67 dated 28th March 1967, on the above subject, I am directed to state that the matter has been got examined and it is clarified that disciplinary proceedings under C.C.A. Rules cannot be continued after the retirement of an officer, but that such proceedings may be continued or initiated
as departmental proceedings under Rule 214 of Mysore Civil Service Rules, if circumstances of the case satisfy the conditions of this Rule.
2. In a case, therefore, where disciplinary proceedings have been started prior to the retirement of the officer or during re-employment and if such proceedings were to be continued as departmental proceedings after retirement or final retirement, as the case may be, it would be necessary to make an order that the proceedings shall be continued as departmental proceedings for purposes of Rule 214 after the retirement of the officer.
sd/-
R.Thippoji Rao,
Deputy Secretary to Government,
General Adminstration Department
(Services).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
(FINANCE DEPARTMENT)
O.M.No.FD 133 SRS 67 dated 3rd January 1968
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Withholding/Withdrawal of Pension under Rule 214 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules
Issues clarifications re.-
According to proviso (a) of Rule 214 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules, departmental proceedings, if instituted while the officer was in service, whether before his retirement or during his re-employment, shall, after the final retirement of the officer, be deemed to be proceedings under the said Rule and shall be continued and concluded by the authority by which it was commenced in the same manner as if the officer had continued in service. A question has been raised whether in the case of an officer whose case falls within the purview of the aforesaid proviso and proceedings against whom were instituted by an authority subordinate to the Governor, order for withdrawal/withholding of pension can be passed by the subordinate authority on the conclusion of the proceedings or that authority should refer the case to the Governor for final orders. The matter has been considered and the undersigned is directed to clarify that the function of the Disciplinary Authority is only to reach a finding on the charges and to submit a report recording its findings to Government. It is then for the Government to consider the findings and take a final decision under Rule 214 of the Mysore Civil Services Rules. In case Govt. decide to take action under Rule 214 of M.C.S.Rules in the light of the findings of the Disciplinary Authority, the Government will serve the person concerned with a show-cause notice within such time as may be specified by the Government. The Government will consider the reply and consult the Mysore Public Service Commission. If as a result of such consideration in consultation with the Commission, it is decided to pass an order under Rule 214 of M.C.S. Rs. necessary orders will be issued in the name of the Governor.
The procedure outlines in the preceding paragraph in regard to the issue of show-cause notice will also apply to a case where the Governor functions as the Disciplinary Authority.
sd/-
C.N.Subba Rao,
Special Officer,
Finance Department (Pensions).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 25 SSR 68 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated the 26th June 1968.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Procedurein Disciplinary cases - Withholding of increments.
In Para 3 of Circular No.GAD (S-1) 35 SSR 58 dated 8th January 1959 the Government have pointed out that reduction in pay or postponement of the increment with retrospective effect, except where the pay is held up at an efficiency bar, is a major penalty which attracts the provisions of Article 311 (2) of the Constitution. It would follow that if the procedure prescribed under the Mysore Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1957 for the imposition of a major penalty is not followed, the enquiry proceedings would become vitiated and the penalty would become illegal.
Inspite of these clear instructions, it has come to the notice of the Government that increments, which had accrued due but were not actually granted and paid to the concerned Government servant, are being ordered to be withheld under Rule 12 of the C.C.A. Rules as a measure of penalty. On a Write Petition filed by the aggrieved Government servant against the said punishment, the High Court of Mysore has held that such a punishment is a major punishment as it would amount to reduction in pay and consequently, a reduction in rank, and that the procedure laid down in Rule 11 of the C.C.A. Rules Should have been followed.
The attention of all the Disciplinary and Appellate authorities under the C.C.A. Rules is once again invited to the legal position that an increment which had already accrued due, can be stopped/withheld only in case where an enquiry under Rule 11 of the C.C.A. Rules has been held.
sd/-
W.A.Smith,
Under Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Service Rules).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 47 SSR 68 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, dated the 17th September 1968.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Publication of Notices in respect of Departmental proceedings against Government Servants.
In Circular No.ED 34 TPS 67 dated 27th April 1967, it has been brought to the notice of the Disciplinary Authorities that in cases where a Government Servant is absconding or has remained absent unauthorisedly for a long time, it is necessary that a notice specifying the penalty to be imposed should be published in the Mysore Gazette.
2. In clarification of the abovesaid Circular, the Disciplinary Authorities are hereby informed that it is not necessary to publish along with the notice a copy of the enquiry
report or other document concerned in the enquiry. Legal requirements would be met if only the notice containing briefly the substance of the charges held to be proved, the penalty proposed to be imposed and directing the delinquent official to submit his explanation within a fixed time after publication in the Mysore Gazette be published in the Mysore Gazette. The Disciplinary Authority can proceed to pass final orders only after the expiry of the period mentioned in the notice.
3. This Procedure should also be followed in cases where ex-parte proceedings in accordance with rule 14 of Mysore Civil Service (C.C.A) Rules and the instructions contained in Official Memorandum No.GAD 171 SSR 63 dated 2nd February 1966 are conducted.
sd/-
W.A.Smith,
Under Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Service Rules).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 57 PVC 68 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 18th-21st October 1968.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Disposal of cases received from the State Vigilance Commission -Stipulation of time limit.
Under the Mysore State Vigilance Commission Rules 1965 after the enquiry into any particular case has been completed, the State Vigilance Commission will forward to the Government, the records of the case with the findings of the Inquiry Officer and its recommendations thereon. Thereafter, the concerned Secretariat Department has to examine the case in consultation with the Public Service Commission, where such consultation is necessary under the Mysore Public Service Commission (Consultation) Regulations, 1958, and obtain orders of the Government by placing the subject before the Cabinet, if necessary.
2. I had an opportunity to scrutinise and discuss some of the pending cases with the concerned secretaries. It was found that in many cases, there was unconscionable delay in taking a decision and/passing final orders of Government in certain cases, well over two years have elapsed since the recommendations of the Commission were received, but formal orders of Government have still to issue.
3. Most of the cases have to pass through the following stages where, in varying degrees, delays are caused:-
(1) Delay in examination of the recommendations of the Vigliance Commission:
Normally, it should not be difficult for the Department to carefully go through the recommendations of the Commision together with the relevant records in any particular case within a period of two to three weeks from the date of the receipt of the papers from the Commission. At any rate, as all Vigilance cases have to be accorded very high priority, there is no reason why delay in examination at this stage should not be out to the bearest minimum.
(2) Delay in issue of Show Cause Notice to the accused official:
In fact, there is no justification for the delay at this stage because after the case has been examined in the light of the recommendation of the Commission, in most cases the issue of show cause notice calling upon the accused to furnish his explanation against the punishment proposed, is an inevitable step. All this is required after the necessary examination has been done, is to draft the notice and this need not take more than one or two days.
(3) Reply to the Show Cause Notice:
Normally, a time limit of 15 days is specified in the show cause notice. This should be adhered to rigidly and in no case more than one week's extra grace period should be allowed. The total time accounted by this stage of the proccedings: i.e., between the issue of the show cause notice and the receipt of the reply, must not exceed three weeks.
(4) Examination of the reply from the accused Officer to the Show Cause Notice:
There is no reason why such an examination should take more than a week, at the end of which the Department should be ready with its provisional conclusions regarding the penalty to be imposed.
(5) Reference to the Public Service Commission:
Making of the reference to the Public Service Commission involves only drafting of the letter to the Secretary, Public Service Commission. This should not take more than a day or two. The Commission could be specifically requested to accord their concurrence or their views on the findings of Government in the case under reference as also on the punishment proposed, within a period of 4 to 6 weeks from the date of reference.
(6) Passing of final orders:
The reply of the Public Service Commission to Government's proposals will be either concurrence or suggestions for modificatioins in the findings and quantum or nature of punishment. Final orders can issue, immediately if the Commission agrees with the proposals of Government otherwise the Department has to decide whether it should modify its own stand regarding the punishment etc., to conform to the views of the commission or stick to its original proposal. In the former case when it is sought to accept the modification suggested by the Public Service Commission, there should be no difficulty in issuing final orders on this basis straight away. In the latter event, the Department will have to bring the matter before the Cabinet. There again, as a Cabinet meeting is held every week, it should not be difficult to obtain the orders of the Cabinet within a period of a week to ten days from the date of receipt of the papers from the Public Service Commission. Final orders of the Government on the basis of the decision of the Cabinet should issue within a period of few days from the date of intimation of this decision.
Total time:
It will be seen that the toal time taken up in various stages from the date of the receipt of the report or the recommendations of the Vigilance Commission to the date of issue of final orders must not exceed 14, or say, 15 weeks. Making allowance for the possible back reference from the Public Service Commission another 4 weeks can be added to this period increasing the permissible aggregate time limit to 20 weeks.
4. My examination of a few long-pending cases has disclosed that a good deal of time is wasted in making needless reference to Law Department. For example, it is not always necessary for the draft show cause notice to be put up to the Law Department for vetting. Similarly, the final order imposing the punishment could ordinarily issue without prior
scrutiny of the draft by the Law Department. Only where specific legal issues are involved, in respect of which precedents or case law have not been established and the Department is likely to go wrong, if it acted on its own judgement, the matter should be referred to the Law Department for advice. In majority of cases, the various steps of procedure to be gone through are clear and simple drafting of the show cause notice or the order of punishment should present no serious difficulty requiring guidance of the Law Department.
5. Another misconception which has contributed to a good deal of delay in certain cases is that a second reference to the Vigilance Commission is considered necessary when the Public Service Commission have suggested modification of the findings and punishment proposed by Government, especially because of the conclusions of Government are based on the recommendations of the Vigilance Commission. Such a reference is only unnecessary and must be avoided. It is for Government to take a view as to whether the modification suggested by the Public Service Commission should be agreed to or not. Further advice of the Vigilance Commission at this stage need not be sought.
6. All Departmental Secretaries are requested to kindly consider those observations carefully and make special efforts to ensure that final orders of Government in all disciplinary cases, where recommendations of the Vigilance Commission have been received, are passed expeditiously. In no case, the total time required for processing and issue of final orders should exceed a period of 20 weeks. Wherever this time limit is exceeded, a detailed report on the reason for delay should be made to this office.
R.N.Vasudeva,
Chief Secretary to Government.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 47 SSR 68 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 8th January 1969.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Publication of notices, etc, in respect of departmental proceedings against Government servants -
In Official Memorandum No. GAD 47 SSR 68 dated 17th September 1968 the need for publication in the Mysore Gazette of substance of notice indicating the charges held to be proved and the penalty proposed to be imposed, etc. against a delinquent Government servant whose whereabouts are not known has been indicated. It is further clarified that to meet the requirement of law, it is also necessary to publish in the Gazette a notice that final order has been passed. It is, however, not necessary that the order be published in extenso.
W.AW.A.Smith,.Smith,
Under Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Service Rules).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 7 SSR 69 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 25th March 1969.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Penalty of reduction - Specifying the period.
In Official Memorandum No. GAD (S-1) 44 SSR 59 dated 20th July 1959, instructions were issued to the effect that whenever penalty of reduction in rank is imposed on Government Servants under the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, the period of reduction to the lower service should be for a specific period to be mentioned in the order imposing the penalty and that delinquent Government servant should be considered for promotion when the next vacancy occurs after the expiry of period. It has also been laid down that restoration to the original grade is not automatic.
In view of the specific provision in the Mysore Civil Services Rules (Please vide note below Rules 59 (2) to the contrary, it is necessary to modify the instructions issued in the aforesaid Official Momorandum. It is accordingly directed that the last sentence occuring in the Official Memorandum viz. "After the period expires, he is not automatically restored to the higher grade but will be eligible to be considered for promotion when the next vacancy occurs" should be deleted.
W.A.Smith,
Under Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Service Rules).
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 57 PVC 68 Mysore Government Secretariat,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 7th June 1969.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Disposal of cases received from the Bureau of Investigation of the Vigilance Commission - Stipulation of the time limit-
Under the provisions of the Mysore State Vigilance Commission Rules, 1965, the Vigilance Commision may investigate or enquire into the allegations made against Government servants either suo motu or on a reference from Government or from any other authority. If after the investigation is completed by the Bureau of Investigation in any case, the Commission is of opinion that disciplinary proceedings should be taken in such a case, it will forward the record of investigation along with its recommendations to Government. After examining such records Government will have to take a decision whether an enquiry is to be held or not.
2. It has been brought to the notice of Government that there is a large number of such cases where no decisions have been taken on the investigation reports or preliminary reports of the Bureau of Investigation of the Vigilance Commission. Before a Departmental Enquiry is ordered against a Government servant it is necessaty to scrutinise the evidence collected in course of preliminary enquiry and the authority competent to order the enquiry is to satisfy itself that there is prima facie case for starting disciplinary
proceedings against the Government servant concerned. It should not be difficult for the disciplinary authority to go through the record of investigation of the Vigilance Commission in any particular case within a period of 2 to 3 weeks from the date of receipt of the papers from the Vigilance Commission and take a decision whether regular inquiry proceedings by appointing an Inquiry Officer should be ordered or the appropriate disciplinary authority asked to take action in accordance with the provisions of Rule 12 of CCA Rules. Once a decision to institute inquiry proceedings is taken, special care should be taken to ensure that the entire proceedings are completed within a maximum period of 5 months (This will include the time taken to appoint an Inquiry Officer).
3. The above time limit should be strictly adhered to. Where for certain reason it is exceeded, it will be the duty of the departmental Secretary to make a detailed report to GAD giving particulars of the case received from the Vigilance Commmission after necessary investigation by the Commmission, the decision taken by the Department for institution of Inquiry proceedings and the progress of such inquiry.
4. All pending cases should be reviewed in the light of these instructions and a special report may be submitted to the Chief Secretary by 20.6.1969 without fail.
R.N.Vasudeva,
Chief Secretary to Government.
GOVERNMENT OF MYSORE
No.GAD 42 SSR 69 Mysore Government Secretariat,
General Administration Department,
Vidhana Soudha,
Bangalore, Dated 25th August 1969.
OFFICIAL MEMORANDUM
Sub:- Bar for promotions during the period of penalty.
A case has come to the notice of Government in which the penalty of withholding increments for a period of 2 years was imposed on an officer and the officer became due for promotion to the higher post during the period. The question whether the officer should or should not be promoted during the period for which his increments were withheld had thereforce to be decided having regard to the nature of misconduct for which the penalty was imposed.
2. Under the Classification, Control and Appeal Rules, withholding of increments and withholding of promotions are distinct penalties and it is necessary for the Disciplinary Authority at the time of imposing the penalty to make its intention clear in the order. A similar question may arise in a case where an officer is reduced to a lower stage of pay in the same time scale of pay for a specified period. In all such cases where penalties of withholding of increments or reduction to a lower stage of pay in a time scale of pay are imposed, the Disciplinary Authorities imposing such penalties should invariable consider the nature of misconduct for which the penalty is being imposed and clarify in the order itself whether during the period for which the increment is withheld or the officer is reduced to a lower stage of pay, is to be considered as an eligible for promotion. If having regard to the nature of the misconduct, the Disciplinary Authority considers that the officer should not be eligible for promotion, the penalty of withholding of promotion for such period should also be imposed in the order itself.
Syed Basheer Ahmed,
Dy. Secretary to Government,
General Administration Department,
(Services).