CourtMesh

Section 17

Security of Service Rules 1981State Rules of Punjab · 1979

(l) Whenever the punishing authority is of opinion that there Procedure for are grounds for inquiring into the truth of any imposing penolties. imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour against an employee, it may itself inquire into or appoint under this rule an authority to inquire into the truth thereof.

(21 Where it is proposed to hold an inquiry against an employee, the punishing authority shall draw or cause to be drawn up- 0 The subsistance of the imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour, as the case may be, into definite and distinct articles of charges ;(ii) a statement of imputation of misconduct or misbehaviour in support of each article of charge, which shall contain-

(a) a statement of all relevant facts including any admission or confession made by the employee ;(b) a list of documents by which and a list of witnesses by whom the articles of charges are proposed to be sustained.

(3) The punishing authority shall deliver or cause to be delivered to the employ ee a copy of the articles of charge, the statement of the imputations misconduct or misbehaviour and a list of documents and witnesses by which or whom each article of charge is proposed to be sustained and shall require the employee to submit within fifteen days a written statement of his defence.

Note ;--For Com,puting the period of fifteen days, the time required for making available such record' to the employee for inspection or taking extract.s there from shall be excluded.

(a) The employee ffidV, on his written request, be permitted to engage a Legal practitioner to defend him, and .to inspect or taltre SECURITY OF SERVICE RULES' 19t1 Annexure L 314 ur' i exttacts from the records, pertaining to the case for the purpose of I preparing a writtcn statement' i (5) On receipt, d the written statement of de-Ience' the punishing authoritv ma-v itsliirl-q.rir" ili; ilch of the articles of charges as are not admitteH ;; ii'ii-;;ria; it- n".essarv so . to do, appoint an authority for !!e p-urp""J, inJl"h.",* .n tM-articles of charges have been admitted by the emii*A il:ttt.*;itten statement of defence' the nunishinq authority shaf;;;e it" findings on each'charge.

I r-

(6)Ifnowrittenstatementofdefenceo-:llTl,j"dbytheemployee within the specified ,i-", "iH d;;i not appear in perion or through h is Lawv" r-6Jr6;;d ilq;rrffi iiF" tL, Tt-oi[" t*ise ralt s or re f us e s to compry with the proui"-iln"r3r t[!f ;;E th" p,r.ishing authoritv mav itselr hord the inquiry ;il;;;;;--lf il;"iiati. necessarv t9 do so ippoi,rt.'i,rq.riiiiigi"r'tSlitv=rJiti'&;;;;;;;;dth5"?il|L'r'ff 11:

ilfi;;e itt"- J".ord! of.the ineuirv tr tompetent to impole the penalty r shall be entitled to

(7) During the Cortrse "t iry:iry. the emplovee cross examinz the witnesses,examin;a itt i"p-poii of ttt" articles of charges .rJ io giye ".rii"i.":in perso"-""a tohave such witnesses as may ue prJd.iqiJ.-"*umined'in his detence.

(8)Wheneveranyinquiring-autho{ty,afterhaving.heardand recorded the whole o, urlvE;ffif t#;;fi;ti itt an enquiry ceasgs' to exercise its jurisdiction-ih5r"i' qnd dilaededbv another inguirtng authoritv -w,hich has .iJ'i.1,i.t, "i"tcises, - r,rofi iurisdiction, the inquiring authority so "i.J".ai.s -ui=u.-i-"-" irrl ""id6tt"" so re-corded bv its eredecesso-r ", ili,ii-il?"iJJa-& .o;;tali"""or and partlv i6."tdld bY itself :

provided that if the succeeding- inquiring authority is oJ opinion that furthzr examingtign;;; ;iirr" ilitneEses *ttorl evidence has already b;; iecorded is necessary'ii hi- ilterest of iustice, it" mav record, examine, c.rgs:;il;il;;i *.*i-i"e anv such witnesses as hereinbefote provrdeo' r__..i*r t a .,ortt .epared

(9)Aftertheconclusionoftheinguiryareportshallbepr and h'shall contain-

(a) The articles gt chalggs and the statement of imputations of +i"jn*:u"'"i"ii:"#i"ru in respect of each article of :lt:3fu#i", of the evidence in respect of each article or il;tff"a", on each ardcle of chargc and the rcaronr tHcrclor-

Explanation :-(r) tf in the-o.rpinion of th.e inquiring authority the pdail;;iti"iilqii#"';iigl{iili.ili"*iffJilff"1t*Xg,t',:f it " "tisinil articles of charge ; it mi "t tl::t;oed that the findings.on such article of charge shall not be ,uce,a"I'il"i?::##nt#ll#[:ilpli*l;';;nffi i$'] such arl defendi;;tdii "I"i"st.

iuch articles of charge'

(ii)Theinquiringglrtlrorilv,where.itisnotitselfthepunishing authority, sfiail for,^,urd -i;-Jh." p","i"nfi authority 'the ;il;e;',il iiiliirv -dr,i.h shall include- Ano**. t- \cr ) SECURITY OF SERVICE RUI.ES, 1981 315

(a)

(b)

(c)

(d) the report by it under sub.rule (9) ;

the writtgn statement of defence, if any, submitted by the employee ;

the oral aid,documentary evidence produced in the course of thb inquiry ; .

written briefs, if inv, fiied by the ,Presenting Officer or the employee or bolli durindthe course of the enquiry ;

and(e) the orders, if any, made brr the punishing authority and the inquiring authority in regard to the inquiry.

Where this provision sits

ActSecurity of Service Rules 1981
Section17
JurisdictionState of Punjab
StatusIn force as published by the source

Find the provision, not just read it

The full text above is free, and it stays free. What a free CourtMesh account adds is everything you cannot do by reading one page at a time:

  • Search 49,000+ Central and State enactments by what a provision says, not by its number
  • Jump from any section to every judgment that has applied it
  • Search 300 million+ Indian court records alongside the statute
  • Ask a research agent to find and read the case law on a provision for you

Free account. No card. About a minute to create.

Create a free account

Need this as data, not as a page? Security of Service Rules 1981 is one of 49,000+ enactments on CourtMesh. The Indian court cases API serves the case law that cites these provisions over JSON, with API documentation and plans and pricing. See also the judgment library.