1. Verifying the appointment order and the enclosed documents
Ex-01: A Superintendent (Inquiry Authority) receives an appointment order to inquire into charges against a Senior Assistant for alleged misappropriation of funds. The Superintendent checks that the order was issued by the correct Disciplinary Authority (the Head of Department) and verifies that all enclosures mentioned in the order are present, including the charge sheet, statement of imputations, and list of documents and witnesses.
Ex-02: The Inquiry Authority notices that the charge sheet mentions “violation of Rule 9 of APCS Conduct Rules, 1964” but the enclosed statement of imputations refers to “Rule 9(4)”. The IA brings this discrepancy to the Disciplinary Authority’s attention for correction before proceeding.
Ex-03: The Inquiry Authority verifies that the written statement of defence submitted by the Charged Officer is properly signed and dated, and confirms that the Controlling Officer of the Charged Officer and the Presenting Officer have been informed of the hearing date as required.
2. Analysing and understanding the Charges
Ex-01: The Inquiry Officer receives a charge against a Junior Assistant for “unauthorized absence from duty for 45 days.” The IA analyses: What was the employee required to do? (obtain proper leave sanction). What did he fail to do? (apply for leave or report for duty). Which rule was violated? (Rule 3(1) of APCS Conduct Rules - devotion to duty).
Ex-02: A charge states that a Section Officer “failed to maintain absolute integrity” by recommending a relative’s tender without disclosure. The Inquiry Officer breaks this down: The fact is the tender recommendation; the omission is failure to disclose relationship; the conduct rule violated is Rule 3(1) requiring maintenance of integrity and impartiality.
Ex-03: A charge against a Mandal Revenue Officer for “misconduct” is analyzed: What did he do? He accepted a gift from a contractor. What was required? Under Rule 6 of Conduct Rules, no gift shall be accepted from persons having official dealings. The IA identifies this as a clear violation of specific conduct rules rather than a vague allegation.
3. Acknowledging the appointment
Ex-01: The Inquiry Authority receives the appointment order on 1st June. On the same day, he sends an acknowledgment to the Disciplinary Authority stating that he has taken charge of the matter and will commence proceedings as per Rule 20 of CCA Rules, 1991.
Ex-02: The Inquiry Officer, due to his pending transfer, informs the Disciplinary Authority within 48 hours that he may not be able to complete the inquiry and requests reallocation to another IA to avoid delay.
Ex-03: The IA acknowledges receipt but points out that the records sent are incomplete - the copies of statements of witnesses (Annexure III) are missing. He requests the Disciplinary Authority to supply the complete documents before fixing the preliminary hearing.
4. Establishing Process
Ex-01: The Inquiry Authority creates Daily Order Sheet No.1 on the day of receiving appointment, recording: “Received appointment order from the Disciplinary Authority. Acknowledged receipt. Scheduled preliminary hearing for 15th June. Notices dispatched to Presenting Officer and Charged Officer.”
Ex-02: On 5th June, the IA issues the first set of notices. The Daily Order Sheet records: “Notices issued to Presenting Officer (Sri X, Section Officer) and Charged Officer (Sri Y, Senior Assistant) for appearance on 15th June at 11:00 AM in the Conference Hall. Both notices sent via registered post and acknowledgment due.”
Ex-03: The IA maintains a separate file for all correspondence and orders. The Daily Order Sheet captures: “Defence Assistant nomination received from Charged Officer - Sri Z, another Senior Assistant from same department. Controlling Officer informed and DA’s availability confirmed.”
