VIGILANCE MANUAL VOLUME III - AP Online

884 DECISION - 484
State of U.P. vs. Shatrughan Lal,
1999(1) SLJ SC 213
The respondent was a Lekhpal in the service of the Uttar
Pradesh State Government. He was dismissed from service after a
regular departmental inquiry. The matter came up before the
Supreme Court on the question that the findings of departmental
proceedings and the order removing him from service were illegal
and void.
The Supreme Court held that the preliminary enquiry is
conducted invariably behind the back of the delinquent employee
and it constitutes the whole basis of the charge-sheet. Before a
person is called upon to submit his reply to the charge-sheet, he
must, on a request made by him in that behalf, be supplied the copies
of the statements of witnesses recorded during the preliminary enquiry
particularly if they are proposed to be examined at the departmental
inquiry, and that a lapse in this regard would vitiate the departmental
proceedings. Copies of the documents indicated in the chargesheet
to be relied upon as proof in support of articles of charges
were also not supplied nor was any offer made to him to inspect
those documents. If the disciplinary authority did not intend to give
copies of the documents, it should have indicated in writing that he
may inspect those documents. Supreme Court dismissed the appeal.
(484)
Lokayukta / Upa-Lokayukta
Lokayukta/Upa-Lokayukta (Karnataka) has no
jurisdiction to investigate disproportionate assets
cases.
State of Karnataka vs. Kempaiah,
1999 (2) SLJ SC 116
On 17.12.92, an unsigned representation containing